On Fri, Apr 05, 2002, Tim Peters wrote:
[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.
You'll note that I started this exchange by asking why pre-2.0 was a requirement, with none of the responses directly addressing my question. I'm certainly not competent to analyze the code, but I think I can at least ask interesting questions. ;-) -- Aahz (aahz@pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ "There are times when effort is important and necessary, but this should not be taken as any kind of moral imperative." --jdecker