Anybody using NextStep?

[Christian Brabandt]

Hi,

A pull request to the Vim repository has been made to remove NextStep
support for Vim: https://github.com/vim/vim/pull/18079

Before merging, I'd like to make sure no one is relying on it.

If you are, please let us know by September 1st either here or comment
directly on the PR. If I don't hear anything, I'll go ahead and move
forward with the change.

Thanks!

Christian
--
"The following is not for the weak of heart or Fundamentalists."
-- Dave Barry

[jr]

hi,

> A pull request to the Vim repository has been made to remove NextStep
> support for Vim: https://github.com/vim/vim/pull/18079
> Before merging, I'd like to make sure no one is relying on it.
> If you are, please let us know by September 1st either here or comment
> directly on the PR. If I don't hear anything, I'll go ahead and move
> forward with the change.

unsure if it applies/matters, affecting perhaps 'gvim', my window
manager of choice is WindowMaker.
<www.windowmaker.org/>

> Thanks!

no, thank you!

--
regards, jr.

You have the right to free speech, as long as you're not dumb enough
to actually try it.
(The Clash 'Know Your Rights')

this email is intended only for the addressee(s) and may contain
confidential information. if you are not the intended recipient, you
are hereby notified that any use of this email, its dissemination,
distribution, and/or copying without prior written consent is
prohibited.

[Tony Mechelynck]

On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 9:35 PM Tony Mechelynck
<antoine.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 2:47 PM 'Christian Brabandt' via vim_announce
> <vim_an...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > A pull request has been opened to remove NextStep support for Vim:
> > https://github.com/vim/vim/pull/18079
> >
> > Before merging, I’d like to make sure no one is still relying on it.
> >
> > If you are, please let us know by September 1st, by commenting directly on the PR. If I don’t hear anything, I’ll move forward with the change.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Christian
>
> Hm, I personally use only GTK3 and Motif at the moment; but see
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNUstep which seems to imply that
> NextStep and its descendants are still "alive and kicking" on
> "Unix-like operating systems and Windows".
>
> This said, as I don't use anything based on NextStep myself, I
> wouldn't personally be hurt if support for it is removed. This is just
> to advise caution.
>
> Best regards,
> Tony.

[Christian Brabandt]

On Fr, 22 Aug 2025, Tony Mechelynck wrote:
> > Hm, I personally use only GTK3 and Motif at the moment; but see
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNUstep which seems to imply that
> > NextStep and its descendants are still "alive and kicking" on
> > "Unix-like operating systems and Windows".
> >
> > This said, as I don't use anything based on NextStep myself, I
> > wouldn't personally be hurt if support for it is removed. This is just
> > to advise caution.

This is not about the GNUstep Window manager, it's rather about a
specific flavor of Unix(?) which is long obsolete.

Best,
Christian
--
Grand Master Turing once dreamed that he was a machine. When he awoke
he exclaimed:
"I don't know whether I am Turing dreaming that I am a machine,
or a machine dreaming that I am Turing!"
-- Geoffrey James, "The Tao of Programming"

[Christian Brabandt]

Charles,

On Mo, 25 Aug 2025, Charles Campbell wrote:
> I think it would be a Good Idea to have a procedure for this sort of thing,
> and to publish it in the Vim Manual someplace.
>
> *1 announce that something is being considered for deprecation (comments
> accepted)
> *2 deprecate by surrounding the relevant code with #ifdef blocks and await
> any screams of protest. With this approach you'll get notified if anyone is
> using the feature/support and they can reverse it by putting a #define
> SOMETHING in vim.h.
> *3 release vim with the #ifdef SOMETHING blocks
> *4 next release remove the SOMETHING blocks
>
> At any point until the last one reversal of the change is easy. *2 is likely
> to get protestations amongst those who pay attention to the vim/vimdev
> groups. *3 will get protestations from those who are using the deprecated
> feature. Finally, *4 will remove the feature/support.

Thanks, that makes a lot of sense. Yes I need to document this, it's
been on my list for a while already.

Thanks,
Christian
--
Canada Post doesn't really charge 32 cents for a stamp. It's 2 cents
for postage and 30 cents for storage.
-- Gerald Regan, Cabinet Minister, 12/31/83 Financial Post

[Eric Marceau]

Not everyone gets around to doing updates/upgrades immediately!

I concur by supporting this more disciplined (gradual) approach (mentionned below by Charles Campbell) of blocking out the code using #ifdef, then allowing the resultant "handicapped" code into the "wild" for at least 6 months.

After 6 months, any newer release is likely to have been installed and tested by those who have a critical vested interest in ensuring continuity of their preferred tools, especially if they know their OS (a.k.a. NextStep) is being gradually abandoned by upstream tool providers like Vim/GVim or others.

If the OS providers themselves consider the tool critical enough to their own internal processes, or as part of the User-expected toolset deployed with their OS, I am sure that they will make their voices be heard and speak up!

[aro...@vex.net]

> *Not everyone* gets around to doing updates/upgrades *immediately*!
>

NeXT machines were sold from 1988 to 1993, and it's OS, Next step lingered
on for a while, bits of it apparently ending up in Mac OS X.

https://www.computinghistory.org.uk/det/927/NeXT-Computers/

Sales weren't spectacular, and with the newest machines 30 years old, it's
unlikely any are being updated regularly, so a cautious policy as proposed
sounds perfectly reasonable.