April 5, 2002
6 p.m.
[Aahz]
... I am not talking about some abstract general case; it looks to me that in this specific case backward compatibility isn't an issue, and I still have not seen any explanation for why I'm wrong.
Well, give us a reason to believe you're right <wink>. Specific cases can't be decided on "general principles" -- the only way to know what vim's needs actually are is to study its source code. Have you done that? I haven't.