After a few evil days...

Michael Markert markert.michael at
Mon Aug 8 12:24:28 CEST 2011

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.



[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).

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : 

More information about the implementations-list mailing list