neovim

When I say vim, I also mean neovim, which currently is already superior to vim in a lot of ways.

It's a third party plugin, it's definitely a Neovim issue because the file corruption doesn't happen with Vim.

You offered no solution except to use neovim, which happens to be 'supported' by the /amazing/ company you're the CEO of.

Although some features are a work in progress, Neovim isn't at a stable point.

The leaders of large projects like Neovim are seldom critical of the competition, and when they express criticism it is measured and proportionate.

I wonder if in the future we could leverage neovim's API functionality to have completely true vim bindings/editing within emacs.

Vim and neovim have chosen very different design constraints, and there's no reason why they can't continue to exchange code where it makes sense.

So you recommend neovim, which is good, except that it won't install -- not on some unused OS, but on OS X 10.6.8 (Snow Leopard).

Using Neovim should be done with caution as things may change.

Also, it just so happens that the people working on NeoVim are currently porting all IO to libuv (the cross-platform library mentioned in the article).

NeoVim is supposed to strip out some of these antiquated features.

Meanwhile, the plugin support in Neovim is worlds better.

The plugin system in Neovim is only "better" for people who actually want async plugins.

"...they explicitly allow forks like neovim for the aspects they can't find time for." With the risk of sounding like captain obvious here, but in open source you do not have the luxury to allow or disallow forks, they just happen.

Although Neovim's codebase is significantly cleaner than vim's, its still a far cry from what I would call good.

We maintain plugins for many text editors, including Vim and Neovim.

My company has not contributed a cent to Neovim.