On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Vegard Øye <[email protected]> wrote:

Yes, this is the "right" way to do it. What Viper does is to check if the text to be pasted ends with a newline, which might fail at the end of the buffer. (But that doesn't seem to be the problem here.)

I should probably reimplement block pasting in terms of yank-handler, and maybe redefine the `viper-[Pp]ut-back' functions, too. But then there's XEmacs ...

If you want to fix this, why would you fix it in Vimpulse? Why not in Viper? :)

...

TBH, if it weren't for the fact that Viper supports XEmacs already, I would never have bothered with XEmacs compatibility. And I think Vimpulse would have been better off without it. Every time I encounter some XEmacs idiosyncracy needing special treatment, Vimpulse's code inevitably grows exponentially, no matter how hard I try to do things "cleanly" with reuseable functions that do what I want depending on the circumstances.

You're the maintainer. It's 100% fine for you to stop supporting XEmacs if you want. If you do so, may I suggest you put in a message in the documentation stating what the last XEmacs-compatible Vimpulse version is, and pointing out that someone else can take over XEmacs support if they want. If you want, you can also decide that all the new XEmacs support code that people contribute from now on must go into a separate file in the Vimpulse source tree. But that might be a bit of a harsh decree. :) -- Jason Spiro: software/web developer, packager, trainer, IT consultant. I support Linux, UNIX, Windows, and more. Contact me to discuss your needs. +1 (416) 992-3445 / www.jspiro.com