> On 28/03/10 18:28, Benjamin R. Haskell wrote:
> > Andy Wokula just uploaded what seems like a useful plugin called
> > 'motpat'. Months from now, there's no way I'd remember 'motpat'
> > comes from "create MOTion mappings defined by a PATtern".
> >
> > Can't we all agree that the 8-character limit is absurd at this
> > point? Are there systems that still have trouble with>8?
> >
> > To be clear, I'm not picking on his plugin's name in particular --
> > I've just wondered for a while why this is still part of
> > :help write-plugin
> > which states that 8 characters is "to avoid problems on old Windows
> > systems".
> >
>
> Not only old Windows systems (and, of course, MS-DOS) but also some
> Dos emulators and/or some filesystems. See doc/vi_diff.txt lines 758
> sqq, and the help for 'shortname'.
I'm aware that there are tons of legacy/compatibility systems for which
this causes problems. Are there any systems in common, current use for
which this causes problems? (Why would people be using Vim in DOS
emulators?)
To reframe the suggestion: can't this be something that systems with
those limitations should be expected to deal with -- so that everyone
else gets the benefit of sensible names?
Even in the standard runtime files, 298 of 1117 '.vim' files have names
that don't fit into 8.3.
((
find ~/hg/vim/runtime -name '?????????*.vim' | wc -l
vs.
find ~/hg/vim/runtime -name '*.vim' | wc -l
))
It just seems silly to continue to follow this arbitrary restriction
based on historical systems that: 1. aren't still in common use, and 2.
already *have* to work around the issue anyway to use the standard set
of runtime files.
--
Best,
Ben
--
You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to vim_use+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words "REMOVE ME" as the subject.
No comments:
Post a Comment