Why I stopped using viper, and am going to stop using Evil

Titus von der Malsburg malsburg at gmail.com
Fri Mar 2 16:02:37 CET 2012

On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 6:08 AM, Michael Markert
<markert.michael at googlemail.com> wrote:
> @ Matt
> Well I don't think it's evil's goal to reimplement Vim faithfully
> because it'd much more work than just to merge the two (or copy the best
> things) with little gain.
> I'm also not sure what do you hope to gain with an Emacs that behaves exactly
> like Vim but is not Vim.

One of the great benefits of Evil is that it allows me to switch
between Vim and Emacs with little mental effort.  (For me, this marks
nothing less than the end of the great editor wars.)  At work, I often
have to do stuff on machines that don't have Emacs installed.  I love
the fact that, in these situations, I can effortlessly switch to Vim.
For this reason, I think it's highly desirable that things work the
same in Vim and Evil to the extend possible.  Of course Evil should
also take advantage of the all the goodies that are present in Emacs
but where possible it should stick to how things work in Vim.

If Evil would start to deviate from Vim, this would also make it
difficult for new users to switch and it would require a lot of new
documentation for Evil.  Right now, I often just refer to Vim
documentation when I want to know how something works in Evil, which
is great.


More information about the implementations-list mailing list