← Back to context

Comment by rlue

8 hours ago

The argument is that developers have a duty not to arbitrarily delete data on your system that you may have relied on that was produced by another program just because they’d like to replace it with something in their own format.

I don’t care if you’re volunteering your time; if you build something whose implied purpose and success depends on other people using it, you emphatically have a duty to those people not to silently destroy stuff that was there before your software was.

It's worth pointing out that vim is not "another program" as far as Neovim is concerned. It's an earlier version of the same program. Neovim is a fork of vim, not a totally different editor that happens to share part of a name.

  • It absolutely is another program, I can tell this because it has a different name. To run it I type "nvim" instead of "vim". I use different config files to control its behavior. I install a different package on my system when I want to use it on a new computer.

    • If it really is another program with reference to vim, it should leave undo files made by vim alone.

      If it's going to nuke vim's undo files, it can't hide behind "another program".

      2 replies →

    • > I use different config files to control its behavior.

      From what I can gather, you can use the same vimrc file to control both vim and neovim.