On 8 Aug 2011, Frank Fischer wrote:
On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 12:32:06AM +0200, Michael Markert wrote:
I'm very excited to get away from viper and you really did a nice job with evil. Thank you!
You're welcome, but don't hesitate to say this again ... ;)
Well then: I f*ckin love the prefix :D
* Input-Method-Handling is missing
Well, that's right. Input methods have to be deactivated in normal and visual-state but should be active in operator-pending state. We have to work on this ...
I think my code does that already. But I'm not sure how robust it is. The handling in viper looks quite messy so I rather not copy it.
* evil-states are no good default
This can be argued. Almost all modes that I use are editing modes and for me it is easier to have evil come up in normal-state as default.
Perhaps we could add a switch to select the default for all modes that are listed in none of those mode-lists (and add `evil-normal-state-modes' as well). Of course, the best possibility would be to detect whether the current major-mode is indeed an editing mode, but I have no good idea how to accomplish (one, could, e.g., detect whether the mode is derived from text-mode, but this is not true for all editing modes).
I like the idea to user-define the default, because it's highly dependent on the user, as you mentionend.
Another useful feature could be to define a new (ex-?)command (e.g., :set-evil-default) to change the default mode for the current major-mode. I had something like this in vim-mode and it worked quite well. This way the users do not have to change their config by manually editing the file but the customization is changed (semi-)automatically.
I keep my config under version control and don't like them changed automatically, but I think that's a nice feature to have, though.
In my opinion (I do not know about Vegard?) the only thing missing is ex mode. I hope I can finish it by the end of this week, but we will see. Besides evil contains already all featues a want for the 1.0 release. This means the most urgent things are finding bugs, missing key-bindings and commands/motions that really should go into 1.0 (and, of course, someone has to deal with input-method stuff ... ;)).
Well then I'll take a deeper look at the input-method stuff ;)
Furthermore there are the tedious tasks like writing the documentation. The public api should be fixed (and we should define what belongs to the public api and must therefore not change for 1.x), packages for elpa (or so) have to be created.
I noticed the PDF documentation but there are no sources in the repository: What's the format of choice to generate the docs? From the PDF I'd deduce it's LaTeX, but where is the source? [1]
So the best everyone can do is to use evil in the daily work and report bugs and missing features (send patches, if possible), tell us what is really missing and praise the developers.
Sure will do! I think I already got 2 Bugs, I'll carry those to the issue tracker. Michael Footnotes: [1] As Texinfo would be nice to have (info files), there's pandoc[2]. But I've not yet worked with it and don't know how well it supports LaTeX (it says a subset). [2] http://johnmacfarlane.net/pandoc/