I think I missed part of the story. Is there something wrong with Vim 9? Is it heavily LLM-driven now? That's the only hint I could find on the Vim Classic site.
With respect to the creator, Vim9 script is inferior to Lua in terms of adoption, learning curve, stability, features and probably performance. If the purpose is to serve users a new DSL is not really defensible when Neovim has proved Lua works
Chu4eeno 2 days ago [-]
I only noticed it when a slew of security holes (re-)introduced by uncritical merging of LLM code got CVEs assigned.
Luckily I was lazy running a custom build of vim and hadn't updated since they started lowering the merge barrier (or however you can put this politely).
nxrabl 3 days ago [-]
I wouldn’t have taken this project seriously without the byline on this post of Drew DeVault. Glad he’s doing ok.
Chu4eeno 2 days ago [-]
I'm not a fan of him, but I'm still glad he picked up this.
I hoped the people that wanted neovim features would've stuck to neovim instead of pushing vim to accelerate, but it seems like free LLM tokens made it a bit too tempting.
edit: I'm regarded, I misread your post, ignore me.
NuclearPM 2 days ago [-]
Regarded?
sitzkrieg 2 days ago [-]
it’s doing a funny on “retarded”
nosrepa 3 days ago [-]
I remember talking to him a lot on #minecraft on freenode over a decade ago.
Rendered at 15:41:46 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.
HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47519308
Luckily I was lazy running a custom build of vim and hadn't updated since they started lowering the merge barrier (or however you can put this politely).
Just take a gander on the recent issues listed here, and how completely unavoidable they are: https://github.com/vim/vim/security
I hoped the people that wanted neovim features would've stuck to neovim instead of pushing vim to accelerate, but it seems like free LLM tokens made it a bit too tempting.
edit: I'm regarded, I misread your post, ignore me.