Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 17:22:23 +0100 (BST) From: andrew brian clegg X-X-Sender: fcleg01@sark.cryst.bbk.ac.uk To: Gareth Pearce cc: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: Cygwin survey: Next vim version with perl support? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact CCSG (http://www.cryst.bbk.ac.uk/CCSG/) more information X-MailScanner-cryst-bbk: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-31, required 10, BAYES_01, EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION, FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS, IN_REP_TO, QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, REPLY_WITH_QUOTES, UNSUB_PAGE, USER_AGENT_PINE) Are there any editors available as binary distributions compiled with the -mno-holywars switch? ;-) Andrew. On Thu, 1 May 2003, Gareth Pearce wrote: > Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 01:08:10 +1000 > From: Gareth Pearce > To: cygwin@cygwin.com > Subject: Re: Cygwin survey: Next vim version with perl support? > > > (*) Personally, I think perl support in vim would be nice, but I'm > > absolutely against adding a perl dependence to the vim package. There's > > no reason to drag in yet another 6.5M of stuff if all I want is an editor. > > If that were desirable, I'd just install emacs. > > if 'all i want is an editor' then why get vim at all. > ;) > > Gareth - no bias here, move along, nothing to see. > > -- > Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple > Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html > Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html > FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ > -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/