If you're cloning vim as much as possible, and not adding
other features, why would a person use ruvi instead of vim?
Maybe the same reason why, my friend Gavin, I am using webrick instead of
apache, or instiki instead of perlwiki, or ruby instead of perl/c/awk, no?
If I have all my utilities written in ruby, wouldn't that be great or am I
just being absurd?? In a sense, I am now concerned not just using the
utilities but also of the stuff these utilities are made of.. With ruby, it
is easy to see _that_ inside stuff.. (or maybe I'm getting very old that I
hate seeing c and perl code anymore :-()
Cheers,
Gavin
[1] Yes, vim has a Ruby interface ATM, but it's very limited.
with ruvi, I envision no limits, not even on features 
It's
easy/enjoyable hacking in ruby :-))
kind regards -botp
···
Gavin Sinclair [mailto:gsinclair@soyabean.com.au] wrote:
couldn't have said it better myself.
with ruby's highly dynamic capabilities even
if ruvi doesn't provide a hook into a certain
part of the api (note, its not the aim to not
provide them, just that i'm not naive enough
to believe that my design doesn't have flaws)
you can just add it yourself with a few
mini hacks 
Alex
···
On Fri, Aug 13, 2004 at 03:52:10PM +0900, "Pe?a, Botp" wrote:
Maybe the same reason why, my friend Gavin, I am using webrick instead of
apache, or instiki instead of perlwiki, or ruby instead of perl/c/awk, no?
If I have all my utilities written in ruby, wouldn't that be great or am I
just being absurd?? In a sense, I am now concerned not just using the
utilities but also of the stuff these utilities are made of.. With ruby, it
is easy to see _that_ inside stuff.. (or maybe I'm getting very old that I
hate seeing c and perl code anymore :-()
--
Ummmmm ... Beeeeeeeeerrr.....
- Simpson, Homer