3 ms·
> As it stands now, the use-case for this patch is rather hypothetical. I agreed with you up to this point. As it stands, many utility plugins (like CtrlP and
by fmoralesc 13y ago
> As it stands now, the use-case for this patch is rather hypothetical.
I agreed with you up to this point. As it stands, many utility plugins (like CtrlP and Syntastic) and bundles/ftplugins (vim-python, my own vim-pantondoc) would be improved by this functionality. It is obviously wanted/needed by the Floobits plugin, which motivated the creation of the patches proposed last year. So, I don't think the effort can be reasonably put into question, as you say, even today. People do need async in vim, and also people would want upstream to handle this ASAP, by deciding on some strategy to provide it.
This said, this new message queue API seems cleaner than Floobits', but it seems to cater to python interop only, which is a mayor downside, since many vim plugin users opt out on python or simply lack python support.
- tarruda 13y agoActually, python interop was only a for quickly testing multi-threaded plugins. See the issue tracker for examples of vimscript functions that can be added on top of the message queue: https://github.com/tarruda/vim/issues/2 https://github.com/tarruda/vim/issues/2
- fmoralesc 13y agoThanks a lot, didn't see those. A bit more documentation would be really helpful ;) Otherwise, great work!
- jessaustin 13y ago...many utility plugins (like CtrlP and Syntastic) and bundles/ftplugins (vim-python, my own vim-pantondoc) would be improved by this functionality. Thanks for the correction; clearly I mischaracterized the use-case.