4 ms·

It's not dead, it's finished. It's got all the features of the original vi, therefore mission accomplished. Software doesn't need to be developed ad-aeternum to

by lottin 11y ago

It's not dead, it's finished. It's got all the features of the original vi, therefore mission accomplished. Software doesn't need to be developed ad-aeternum to remain 'alive'.

coldtea 11y ago
>Software doesn't need to be developed ad-aeternum to remain 'alive'. Actually it does, as architectures, APIs, etc change, and if the software doesn't catch up, it can get impossible to run it, or it will need BC compatibility layers, to run 5-10-15 years down the line. Not to mention big changes in how we use the software, e.g. the need to handle utf-8, which didn't exist in Bill Joy's time. >It's not dead, it's finished. It's got all the features of the original vi, therefore mission accomplished. Huh? "got all the features of the original vi"? We ARE talking about the original vi.
- lottin 11y ago
  I thought we were talking about nvi. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nvi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nvi
  - groovy2shoes 11y ago
    Afaik, nvi actually doesn't have all the features of the original vi. According to Wikipedia, "The aspects of nvi that are still marked preliminary or unimplemented are, for the time being, likely to remain that way." Moreover, nvi had been developed for a little while after the various BSDs stopped syncing with upstream due to licensing issues after version 1.79. I honestly think the reason no one develops it anymore is because no one cares. It's good enough for use in emergencies, and beyond that, it's either good enough for the people who use it, or they just use a more featureful editor.
kolme 11y ago
> Software doesn't need to be developed ad-aeternum to remain 'alive'. I have to politely but firmly disagree. Software rots if it's not being actively maintained. Underlying API/ABI's get deprecated and eventually dropped, dependencies reach end-of-life and need to be replaced, and so on. Take one program today and try to run it in 10 years, as is. I bet it won't work. I'm talking of course, of any non-trivial piece of code. "Fizzbuzz" written in an interpreted language... it might even run if you're lucky. (Edit: formatting)
- danieldk 11y ago
  Underlying API/ABI's get deprecated and eventually dropped, dependencies reach end-of-life and need to be replaced, and so on. But BSD vim (nvi) is maintained as part of the base systems of the BSDs, so it changes with system changes although it's in maintenance mode. E.g.: http://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/usr.bin/vi/ http://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/usr.bin/vi/
  - kolme 11y ago
    So yeah, it's being maintained. That's why it doesn't rot.
- iamcurious 11y ago
  Hey, if you want text in italics use asterixs. So > *Software doesn't need to be developed ad-aeternum to remain 'alive'.* becomes > Software doesn't need to be developed ad-aeternum to remain 'alive'.
  - kolme 11y ago
    Fixed it, thanks.

by lottin 11y ago

It's not dead, it's finished. It's got all the features of the original vi, therefore mission accomplished. Software doesn't need to be developed ad-aeternum to remain 'alive'.

coldtea 11y ago

>Software doesn't need to be developed ad-aeternum to remain 'alive'. Actually it does, as architectures, APIs, etc change, and if the software doesn't catch up, it can get impossible to run it, or it will need BC compatibility layers, to run 5-10-15 years down the line. Not to mention big changes in how we use the software, e.g. the need to handle utf-8, which didn't exist in Bill Joy's time. >It's not dead, it's finished. It's got all the features of the original vi, therefore mission accomplished. Huh? "got all the features of the original vi"? We ARE talking about the original vi.

lottin 11y ago
I thought we were talking about nvi. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nvi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nvi
- groovy2shoes 11y ago
  Afaik, nvi actually doesn't have all the features of the original vi. According to Wikipedia, "The aspects of nvi that are still marked preliminary or unimplemented are, for the time being, likely to remain that way." Moreover, nvi had been developed for a little while after the various BSDs stopped syncing with upstream due to licensing issues after version 1.79. I honestly think the reason no one develops it anymore is because no one cares. It's good enough for use in emergencies, and beyond that, it's either good enough for the people who use it, or they just use a more featureful editor.

kolme 11y ago

> Software doesn't need to be developed ad-aeternum to remain 'alive'. I have to politely but firmly disagree. Software rots if it's not being actively maintained. Underlying API/ABI's get deprecated and eventually dropped, dependencies reach end-of-life and need to be replaced, and so on. Take one program today and try to run it in 10 years, as is. I bet it won't work. I'm talking of course, of any non-trivial piece of code. "Fizzbuzz" written in an interpreted language... it might even run if you're lucky. (Edit: formatting)

danieldk 11y ago
Underlying API/ABI's get deprecated and eventually dropped, dependencies reach end-of-life and need to be replaced, and so on. But BSD vim (nvi) is maintained as part of the base systems of the BSDs, so it changes with system changes although it's in maintenance mode. E.g.: http://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/usr.bin/vi/ http://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/usr.bin/vi/
- kolme 11y ago
  So yeah, it's being maintained. That's why it doesn't rot.
iamcurious 11y ago
Hey, if you want text in italics use asterixs. So > *Software doesn't need to be developed ad-aeternum to remain 'alive'.* becomes > Software doesn't need to be developed ad-aeternum to remain 'alive'.
- kolme 11y ago
  Fixed it, thanks.