About ruvi

[Martin DeMello]

i'm not sure what version your using exactly... w/b wrap
the document on purpose. :set works. search and replace i
find stupid anyway. undo broken? no recovery? what sort of
broken ruby implementation are you running it with? gg
works dd works t and f i find unimportant. in what case is
p broken? no command line really so why have a command line
history? macros are in latest .11 version as i said in
the email starting this thread... anyways. all trivial stuff.

'f' is one of my most-used vim keys. I'm surprised you find it
unimportant.

martin

 

[Alexander Kellett]

Anyway, using Ruby as an extension language will kick vimscript's
butt, so I guess you've got a point, even if I have to make it for
you

end of thread. i don't appreciate your attitude at all.

Alex

 

[Florian Gross]

Will there be a rumacs? Just joking

i have nothing fundamental against providing
emacs key bindings, just that i've no interest
in coding it either as i put aside emacs for
vi over 5 years ago already
[...]
how many people are interested in a gtk2 frontend?
if i can have a show of 5 or more hands then i'll
prioritize this.

If you can combine those two then this would definitely be a killer
application for me. (Emacs currently doesn't really feel native on
windows platforms, but Gtk2 can come very close.)

But even without Emacs bindings it would still be useful.

cheers,
Alex

Kind regards,
Florian Gross

 

[Alexander Kellett]

For the record, THIS vim user feels exactly the same as Gavin. You're
never going to convert people who use vim efficiently with a 1% or even
20% clone. I don't use all of vim, but everyone that uses vim's advanced
features uses a different subset.

I was thinking the same as Gavin. How can anyone write a useful vim
clone? I see now that the question has been answered. Good luck with
your goals, and be sure to let us know when you've covered at least 80%
of vim's features, no matter how obtuse you personally believe them to be.

oh yay. another person that hasn't a clue how to do interpersonal
commucation. there seems to be a lot around here these days doesn't
there?

and no. i'm not talking about gavin. we've since my last eot comment
had an interesting thread off mailing list.

for what its worth. i don't disagree. i never did. the point is that
i am prioritizing based on my own needs. just ask a few of the users
that have requested features how long exactly it took to get them
into ruvi.

i'm not even vaguely inspired to work by your troll-ish tone.
maybe you could find different ways to motivate if thats what
your trying to do?

if not. please take the flames elsewhere. i don't have the time
for them at the moment.

cheers,
Alex

 

[vruz]

Gavin and Hans, welcome to the Ruby Gestapo.

Is this yet another censorship effort from the newborn establishment ?

Read my lips:
"Anyone can release anything they want, whenever they want in any form
they want"

You're not obliged to use their code, if you don't want it,
try to be constructive at least.

Now, let's all repeat:
"Free Speech, Free Speech, Free Speech"

cheers,
vruz

 

[Hal Fulton]

Gavin and Hans, welcome to the Ruby Gestapo.

Is this yet another censorship effort from the newborn establishment ?

Read my lips:
"Anyone can release anything they want, whenever they want in any form
they want"

You're not obliged to use their code, if you don't want it,
try to be constructive at least.

Now, let's all repeat:
"Free Speech, Free Speech, Free Speech"

No one is trying to stop anyone from releasing anything.

And no one is stifling free speech.

Alex is free to call ruvi a vim clone if he wishes. And he is
emphatically free to code it and release it.

However, it is natural for people to take exception to something
like this.

Those who like ruvi are welcome to use it. But personally -- and
I think this is all Gavin and Hans were saying -- when I compare
ruvi's functionality to vim's, I'm reminded of Monty Python's
"cheese shop" skit.

But to someone who only uses 1% of vim's features, ruvi will
indeed be a clone (assuming it's the same 1%).

For heaven's sake, let's be civil.


Hal

 

[Austin Ziegler]

Gavin and Hans, welcome to the Ruby Gestapo.

Is this yet another censorship effort from the newborn
establishment?

I think that a whole bunch of people need to settle down and stop
pretending that this is a free speech issue -- and I'm not just
referring to ruvi. I think that ruvi is a neat idea, but Gavin and
Hans are right: unless you're targeting 80% or more of vim's
features, there's no sense in calling it a vim clone. Calling it,
perhaps, a vi-alike editor, or vimlike editor, would be more
accurate.

I don't think that either Gavin or Hans has suggested that ruvi is a
bad project. Instead, they've said that the claim is a bit
excessive, and Alexander has more or less confirmed that it's a
mildly outrageous claim by stating flat-out that he will only be
supporting a subset of vim features.

vim started out with the intent of matching -- and then improving --
upon the features of vi. ruvi appears to be heading a different
direction. It may be a better direction, but it's not a vim-clone
unless it's going to be headed significantly toward the features of
vi and vim. Alexander has said that he won't be supporting the 'f'
motion key (and related keys); the problem is that this is not even
a "vim" feature; it's a *vi* feature. Without this, it's clear that
ruvi won't even be a viclone, much less a vimclone.

This is just an example. No one is trying to silence Alexander or
stop him from releasing ruvi. Instead, they are suggesting that (1)
the claim of "vimclone" is (wildly) misleading and (2) they won't be
using it any time soon because it barely has a few percentage
coverage of vim features. Gavin even suggested that there might be a
better way to approach the problem space.

Read my lips:
"Anyone can release anything they want, whenever they want in any
form they want"

You're not obliged to use their code, if you don't want it,
try to be constructive at least.

Now, let's all repeat:
"Free Speech, Free Speech, Free Speech"

A number of folks from #ruby-lang have used this defence in the last
couple of weeks. Here's a clue: free speech doesn't work that way.
Free speech includes taking responsibility for one's words. There
are no moderators on ruby-talk or clr. Absolutely no one has
suggested that the people involved stop releasing software or
talking about it on the list.

This isn't, has never been, and will never be a free speech issue.
It is a discussion about misleading claims regarding a project that
otherwise looks very interesting. I would suggest to Alexander that
he change the claims because otherwise people will be very
disappointed.

-austin

 

[Alexander Kellett]

Now, let's all repeat:
"Free Speech, Free Speech, Free Speech"

I must be having a bad day. I sometimes sound short when I am. Sorry.

no problem. hope you day improves

However, it is natural for people to take exception to something
like this.

and also for the said author to take exception.

Those who like ruvi are welcome to use it. But personally -- and
I think this is all Gavin and Hans were saying -- when I compare
ruvi's functionality to vim's, I'm reminded of Monty Python's
"cheese shop" skit.

But to someone who only uses 1% of vim's features, ruvi will
indeed be a clone (assuming it's the same 1%).

For heaven's sake, let's be civil.

agreed. more civil phrasings especially would be welcome.
and while i love monty python... i didn't laugh i'm afraid.

just for anyone not on the irc channel thats listening to
this thread with any degree of interest. the implementation
of "f" (and F/T/t) was produced in a fit of boredom as a plugin
in little over 15 minutes during my train journey home.

mvg,
Alex

 

[Alexander Kellett]

flatout statement that i wouldn't implement?
interesting way of reading words you have there austin

as batsman already pointed out. i've implemented everything
requested of me up till now. won't stop doing so either.

Alex

 

[James Britt]

A number of folks from #ruby-lang have used this defence in the last
couple of weeks. Here's a clue: free speech doesn't work that way.
Free speech includes taking responsibility for one's words. There
are no moderators on ruby-talk or clr. Absolutely no one has
suggested that the people involved stop releasing software or
talking about it on the list.

This isn't, has never been, and will never be a free speech issue.
It is a discussion about misleading claims regarding a project that
otherwise looks very interesting. I would suggest to Alexander that
he change the claims because otherwise people will be very
disappointed.

If you're going to argue for free speech, go all the way. I'd like to
think that any rights to free speech include the right to say, "shut
up," however impolite.

It's worth noting, though, that it rarely has the effect one seeks.

Curiously, those pointing out the misleading claim of ruvi being a vi
clone ("It's just like vi. Except when it isn't, which is most of the
time.") are helping the project.

Potential users expecting to find an actual vi clone will be
disappointed, and will knock it for the things missing, rather than
praising it for the good things it offers.

Either way, nobody's speech is being threatened. People can say what
they like. It's just that it cuts both ways.

I think most would prefer that people demonstrate some eloquence and
tact, but, if not, there's always the kill file.

James

 

[Hal Fulton]

agreed. more civil phrasings especially would be welcome.
and while i love monty python... i didn't laugh i'm afraid.

Well, I owe you an apology for the Monty Python reference. It's
not my intention to insult you.

I'm not interested in "who said what" or who was rude first.

Let me attempt to be constructive.

A large part of this misunderstanding stems from the perception
that ruvi was being advertised as a complete and usable vim
clone.

I presume that you weren't really saying that. ruvi may be usable
as an editor right now (it seems it is). And it may aspire to be
a vim clone, though right now I would say it merely has some
features in common with vim.

The common perception was, I think, that a vim clone would implement
at least a large subset of vim's features. Objectively, ruvi isn't
there yet. Subjectively, everyone uses/likes different features of
vim anyway. Even if it implemented 95% of vim, there would still be
people who would want some obscure feature and throw up their hands
because it wasn't there.

FWIW, here are some of the vim commands I use (all I can think of).
The least frequently used is ^V -- the others I use pretty much on
a daily basis.

gg and G
w, b, e, and f
a and A
p and P
yy

 

[vruz]

I think that a whole bunch of people need to settle down and stop

pretending that this is a free speech issue -- and I'm not just
referring to ruvi

I can't respond for "a bunch of people", but since you have replied
to my previous email I understand you are talking to me.

. I think that ruvi is a neat idea, but Gavin and
Hans are right: unless you're targeting 80% or more of vim's
features, there's no sense in calling it a vim clone. Calling it,
perhaps, a vi-alike editor, or vimlike editor, would be more
accurate.

I agree Alex's claim may seem grandiose.
Yet, if you have a look at the code, the ruvi core is complete,
(albeit arguably not mature) anyone can extend it and improve
its feature set to comply with the original vim.

It depends if you have a loook at your favourite keystroke, you
notice it's not there, and you jump to the ML to complain about it.

A number of folks from #ruby-lang have used this defence in the last
couple of weeks. Here's a clue: free speech doesn't work that way.

Again, I'm not a number of folks, if you have something to say
about my post, I'm glad to discuss it.

Free speech includes taking responsibility for one's words. There
are no moderators on ruby-talk or clr. Absolutely no one has
suggested that the people involved stop releasing software or
talking about it on the list.

I am responsible for my words, not sure what may have possibly
made you think otherwise.
I'm not one to dilute responsabilities behind a crowd.

I honestly feel different than you do regarding this issue, and
you're right, it's not just about this thread, but about the
general ambience in the ML.

There are many subtle ways to impose opinions, and I still
believe some people do that pretty consistently.

Strictly speaking about Freedom of Speech:

To me, anyone telling another person "don't say that", "don't claim that",
or "don't do that" is some kind of censorship.

Of course polite suggestions, constructive examples on how to
improve works are always more than welcome, but this has not been
the tone of the ML in a while now.

I reckon I have added some temperature into the equation.

My only intent was to raise some awareness of the power
words can have on people's egos, attitudes and incentivation.

I know this approach isn't doing a service to the ruby community,
so I welcome anyone who may want to discuss this on irc
or via private email.

It is a discussion about misleading claims regarding a project that
otherwise looks very interesting. I would suggest to Alexander that
he change the claims because otherwise people will be very
disappointed.

That's a nice and constructive suggestion, the way it should have
always been from our fellow ruby users, it's very clear to me your
suggestion is in contrast of many previous posts.

-austin

Thanks Austin, thank you all guys.

vruz

 

[Nikolai Weibull]

But to someone who only uses 1% of vim's features, ruvi will
indeed be a clone (assuming it's the same 1%).

I feel it is time for me to say something on this thread.
ruvi (crude) family tree:

ed->vi->vim->ruvi

And remember, I said crude, I do not need any smug responses discussing
Qed's involvement and so on, I bet I know more than most on the subject.

(So much for not being smug I guess)

So, why did I bring up this family tree? Well, a family tree is kind of
like inheritance in object-oriented programming, right? And with
inheritance in OO comes a lot of niceties, but when it comes to
inheritance in programs like the line of editors above, you are bound to
wind up with a lot of the problems humans and other animals experience
when bred in a too small gene-pool. You get stuck in a certain mode of
thinking, which was not really yours to begin with, and you can not
easily get out of it. You're stuck with a lot of cruft from past
generations and new features will depend on cooperating correctly with
the old.

I'm not saying this is wrong-I certainly love having Vim around-but
simply "cloning" 30-40 year old technology will not get you the best end
results.

So, before we all start pressing Alexander for Vim features, just
consider that neither Vim, nor ruvi as a Vim "clone", is a panacea.

As some might remember, about a year ago I started reasoning about and
developing (mostly reasoning to be honest) my master's thesis, which is
centered around regular expressions and text editors. I'm trying to
figure out ways to make regular expressions-and other formal languages
such as regular relations and context-free grammars-much more pervasive
the editing process.

s// and g// are great commands, but they have limitations that are
inherent from the way UNIX was developed. The UNIX philosophy has
always been "everything is a stream of bytes" (well, it's one of the
guiding philosophies anyway)-which certainly causes problems with
Unicode, as this isn't true anymore (well, there's always UTF-8, but I
have a feeling this will a temporary solution to a bigger problem (don't
get me wrong, I like UTF-8 (and nested parentheses)))-yet most tools
deal with streams as records separated by newlines (\n, 0x0a, ^@, ...).
(Again, problems with Unicode as there are now a lot more newlines to
worry about). This restriction certainly limits the possible
applications of commands such as s// and g// and this is what I intend
to remedy. The text editor sam(1) has certainly been a great
inspiration to me and when I read Rob Pike's paper on it I knew I could
not continue using Vim without at least trying to experiment with the
ideas put forth in that paper.

So, in conclusion, limiting oneself to emulate old software has a
tendency to also limit possibilities for implementing new ideas as well.
nikolai

 

[Jamis Buck]

FWIW, here are some of the vim commands I use (all I can think of).
The least frequently used is ^V -- the others I use pretty much on
a daily basis.

In the interest of emphasizing Hal's point that everyone enjoys
different subsets of VIM functionality, let me state that I, on the
other hand, use ^V *all the time*. It's one of my favorite VIM commands.
Similarly (if I may be permitted to append to Hal's list):

q
@@<<
D
*
"*y and "*p
c-V, s-V, and V

(Note: these are given without any knowledge of what ruvi currently
supports; I'll probably install ruvi if for no other than reason than
because I love Ruby and I love vim, and I'm fascinated by the prospect
of combining the two.)

- Jamis

gg and G
w, b, e, and f
a and A
p and P
yy
.
[n]cw
x
z. z- and z+
ZZ
:q
:q!
:w!
:wq
:w
:f
:r
:!shellcmd
:linenum
~
^F and ^B
/ and ?
n
j and k (yes, I sometimes use those)
|
^ and $
:i,j<cmd>
:s
H
L
J
dd
u
^R
^V
^Y
^E
m and '
%
:%s/regex/text/[g]
:i,js/regex/text[g]

--
Jamis Buck
(e-mail address removed)
http://www.jamisbuck.org/jamis

"I use octal until I get to 8, and then I switch to decimal."

 

[Austin Ziegler]

I can't respond for "a bunch of people", but since you have
replied to my previous email I understand you are talking to me.

Not only you.

Again, I'm not a number of folks, if you have something to say
about my post, I'm glad to discuss it.

Frankly, your "free speech" comment was as value-free as could have
been. It meant absolutely nothing.

Free speech includes taking responsibility for one's words. There
are no moderators on ruby-talk or clr. Absolutely no one has
suggested that the people involved stop releasing software or
talking about it on the list.

[...]
I honestly feel different than you do regarding this issue, and
you're right, it's not just about this thread, but about the
general ambience in the ML.

There are many subtle ways to impose opinions, and I still believe
some people do that pretty consistently.

Yes, but hiding behind a blanket statement of "free speech" isn't
the way to combat that. It doesn't mean what you think it means.

Strictly speaking about Freedom of Speech:
To me, anyone telling another person "don't say that", "don't
claim that", or "don't do that" is some kind of censorship.

Utter bollocks. Not that you believe that -- that's factual. But
your belief is about 37 degrees off reality here, and I'll thank you
not to claim that "censorship" means what you said above, because
censorship generally means the suppression of information. There can
be social pressures that resemble censorship (e.g., the social
pressure on this list not to spam its members, or not to act like a
complete ass, or to discuss primarily Ruby), but they are not
censorship in and of themselves. Nothing that Hans, Gavin, or anyone
else said is censorship by any reasonable definition.

My only intent was to raise some awareness of the power words can
have on people's egos, attitudes and incentivation.

Then say that -- don't claim that it's a free speech issue. Nothing
was said that impinged upon Alexander's ability to continue to work
on ruvi. Indeed, I've said harsher words to others who continue to
participate in this forum.

I'm not trying to be difficult here -- it's very important that we
be explicit and accurate in our phrasings especially as there are so
many participants whose first language is not English. Moreover, for
those people whose native country is not the USA, the concept of
"free speech" is different than the absolute free speech concept in
the US (and this is not a bad thing).

In my chosen country (I am a native of the US, but I have chosen to
take citizenship in Canada), free speech is seen as having limits --
more than just those offered by slander, libel, and incitement.
responsibility for one's own words. There is a question of balance
(there are often publication bans related to trials, and those are
often challenged), but it's *not* a question of censorship in
general.

-austin

 

[Alexander Kellett]

q
@@
<<
D
*
"*y and "*p
c-V, s-V, and V

just for everyone else's information.
@@ and "*y/p are both missing.
the rest are finished already.
i've added them to the todo list.

Alex

 

[Jamis Buck]

just for everyone else's information.
@@ and "*y/p are both missing.
the rest are finished already.
i've added them to the todo list.

Alex

Slick, Alex. Thanks! Quick work.

- Jamis

--
Jamis Buck
(e-mail address removed)
http://www.jamisbuck.org/jamis

"I use octal until I get to 8, and then I switch to decimal."

 

[Sean O'Dell]

agreed. more civil phrasings especially would be welcome.
and while i love monty python... i didn't laugh i'm afraid.

Especially when you're publishing the fruits of your labor as open source
software. It's never fun when people jab at your contributions. Thanks for
putting out ruvi, it's a very interesting project!

Sean O'Dell

 

[Chad Fowler]

So, in conclusion, limiting oneself to emulate old software has a
tendency to also limit possibilities for implementing new ideas as well.
nikolai

--

This is why I think ruvi is exciting. It emulates enough of an
environment that I, as a programmer, feel very comfortable in. But
it does it in Ruby, so it's really easy for me and others to
experiment with. I see ruvi as a wonderful springboard from which
some really neat things could happen.

(And I say that knowing that we have Freedom of Speech on this list,
so I could have just as easily said it sucked.

Chad

 

[Gavin Sinclair]

I agree Alex's claim may seem grandiose.
Yet, if you have a look at the code, the ruvi core is complete,
(albeit arguably not mature) anyone can extend it and improve
its feature set to comply with the original vim.

It depends if you have a loook at your favourite keystroke, you
notice it's not there, and you jump to the ML to complain about it.

For the record, I mentioned several keystrokes I saw not (properly)
implemented, explicicty said I wasn't complaining (and that is true,
because the completeness or otherwise of the project doesn't matter
much to me).

I just thought that an examination of the project -- its aims, what
it's done right and wrong -- on the ML would be a good idea. I was
genuinely writing in a light-hearted manner, although with less tact
than usual. When Alex took offense, I apologised off-list.

Cheers,
Gavin