7 ms·

> A standards-conformant implementation of vi is absolutely required to be present No arguments there. This is all correct. The question is: Is Vim not standar

• rbanffy 7mo ago
  > But if Vim is standards-conformant, do people still want vi to be present? Why? It's much smaller and standards-compliant. IIRC, Debian started bundling nano instead of vim because nano is smaller (and easier to quit).
• chasil 7mo ago
  This has been addressed in a few realms, primarily shells. One bash behavior oddity is that, when it is called as /bin/sh, this will work: $ cat pbasher #!/bin/sh alias p=printf p hello\ world!\\n $ ./pbasher hello world! However, changing the shebang to #!/bin/bash results in this: $ ./pbasher ./pbasher: line 3: p: command not found This is because an alias in a script is a POSIX.2 standard, but this historical bash did not allow this. Forcing POSIX mode enables the alias: $ cat pbasher #!/bin/bash set -o posix alias p=printf p hello\ world!\\n $ ./pbasher hello world! In the same way, platforms that care about POSIX.2 compatibility will adjust the behaviors to obtain certification, as bash has done. I saw HP-UX modify ksh88 into sh-posix, and vim also has a VIM_POSIX environment variable that enables a compliant standard mode. There is discussion here: https://vimhelp.org/vi_diff.txt.html https://vimhelp.org/vi_diff.txt.html ...the general GNU environment variable to trigger compliance used to be called POSIX_ME_HARDER.