[HN Gopher] Neovim 0.12.0
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Neovim 0.12.0
        
       Author : pawelgrzybek
       Score  : 251 points
       Date   : 2026-03-29 17:39 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (github.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
        
       | benrutter wrote:
       | Always interesting when a project stays 0 ver for so long- anyone
       | close to the project know what would be considered significant
       | enough for a "v1" release?
        
         | nicebill8 wrote:
         | Possibly never: https://0ver.org/
        
         | suby wrote:
         | There is a roadmap and github issue tracking what is needed for
         | 1.0.
         | 
         | https://github.com/neovim/neovim/issues/20451
         | 
         | https://neovim.io/roadmap/
        
         | kps wrote:
         | Maybe when `:!` works the way vi does and POSIX says it must.
         | 
         | Just kidding, that will never happen.
        
           | markrian wrote:
           | What are referring to, out of interest? Does this apply just
           | to nvim, or vim as well?
        
             | PhilipRoman wrote:
             | In Vim, :! cleans up the tty context and hands it off to
             | the child program, to do whatever it wants, you can open
             | any TUI program and it will work as expected. In Neovim, :!
             | just uses a plain pipe. Actually I believe GVim has the
             | same problem. Since both Vim implementations now have a
             | built in terminal handling stack anyway, I wonder if that
             | could be used to unify the behavior.
        
             | djb-at-durable wrote:
             | Just nvim. Neovim runs :! commands non-interactively,
             | capturing the output in a pipe. vim, on the other hand,
             | suspends itself and runs the command in an external shell.
             | 
             | This isn't a problem, really, for non interactive commands,
             | but causes issues with interactive ones. I personally
             | prefer vim's approach, though not enough to abandon neovim.
        
           | flexagoon wrote:
           | vi compatibility is explicitly a non-goal for neovim
           | 
           | https://neovim.io/charter/
        
         | saint_yossarian wrote:
         | AFAIK it's mostly about stabilizing the RPC API and Lua stdlib:
         | 
         | https://github.com/neovim/neovim/issues/20451
        
       | mi_lk wrote:
       | > - d21b8c949ad7 pack: add built-in plugin manager `vim.pack
       | 
       | Can someone try to sell me this over lazy.nvim? I asked Claude to
       | convert lazy config to pack and I was not happy with it because
       | how verbose it turned out
        
         | c-hendricks wrote:
         | I'm assuming there will be something like lazy.nvim built on
         | top of vim.pack. Some of the conventions might go away (ie
         | constantly calling `.setup`).
        
         | pawelgrzybek wrote:
         | Have a look here. This is incredible guide to the `vim.pack`.
         | 
         | https://echasnovski.com/blog/2026-03-13-a-guide-to-vim-pack....
        
         | NegativeLatency wrote:
         | It being built in sounds nice, although I have some lines in my
         | config that automatically install lazy if it's missing.
        
         | tekawade wrote:
         | Tried to switch but found lazy.nvim better
        
         | flexagoon wrote:
         | > how verbose it turned out
         | 
         | Verbose? The new plugin manager's interface is literature just
         | vim.pack.add({url}), not sure what is verbose about that
        
           | lawn wrote:
           | If you want to replicate the lazy features then it will get
           | verbose. Even using a dedicated plugin for lazy loading it's
           | not as tight as lazy.nvim.
           | 
           | You may argue that you don't need lazy loading, which is
           | fine, but they're not 1-to-1 compatible.
        
         | PhilipRoman wrote:
         | I always thought Vim/Nvim already had a built-in package
         | manager, git clone inside ~/.vim/pack/*/start, am I missing
         | anything by not using a "real" package manager?
        
           | Jare wrote:
           | I imagine you are left with manual dependencies, manual
           | updates, and possibly without lazy loading or portable
           | configuration. That stuff is not strictly necessary and may
           | be easy to roll your own if you're very into it, but it's
           | comfortable to have a standard.
        
           | leephillips wrote:
           | Not really. That's what I do.
        
           | alwillis wrote:
           | > I always thought Vim/Nvim already had a built-in package
           | manager
           | 
           | They do; I used minpac [1] back in the day with Vim. And now
           | Neovim has vim.pack.
           | 
           | Every so often, a movement to create Vim and Neovim
           | configurations with zero (or minimal) 3rd party plugins
           | becomes popular. This means no lazyvim as the package
           | manager.
           | 
           | The lazyvim package manager has all the bells and whistles,
           | especially lazy loading plugins, which reduces Neovim's
           | startup time if you have dozens of plugins installed. My
           | LazyVim [2] configuration has 35 plugins total but only 6
           | load at startup; startup time: 76ms. Plugins you don't use
           | often aren't loaded unless necessary.
           | 
           | [1]: http://vimcasts.org/episodes/minpac/
           | 
           | [2]: https://www.lazyvim.org
        
       | c-hendricks wrote:
       | I unintentionally ran the main branch when testing some changes
       | and a lot of my config broke (mostly around LSPs, CodeCompanion
       | was much slower streaming its responses) so might wait a bit
       | before upgrading.
        
         | vermilingua wrote:
         | The lspconfig depreciation was a very painful upgrade for me
         | too, as it seems to be very poorly documented; but ultimately
         | it came down to moving all of the LSP server configuration to
         | `vim.lsp.config` blocks, then calling `vim.lsp.enable` with all
         | the servers I use.
         | 
         | I'm still not clear on what Mason is doing in my config after
         | the switch but oh well.
        
           | justinmk wrote:
           | It's documented here (with migration steps):
           | 
           | https://github.com/neovim/nvim-lspconfig#important-%EF%B8%8F
           | 
           | and in a pinned issue.
           | 
           | and nvim-lspconfig :help has a migration guide:
           | 
           | https://github.com/neovim/nvim-
           | lspconfig/blob/16812abf0e8d81...
        
           | stryan wrote:
           | Mason installs LSP servers (and other tooling if desired). So
           | if you're managing your LSP servers elsewhere (distro package
           | manager, etc), it's probably not doing much.
           | 
           | Mason was always just a package manager for LSP servers. It
           | used to be you needed the nvim-lspconfig plugin to properly
           | configure LSP servers to work with neovim; to help with that
           | there was the mason-lspconfig plugin that basically mapped
           | LSP servers (as installed by mason) to nvim-lspconfig LSP
           | configurations to make it all Just Work.
           | 
           | Now nvim-lspconfig and mason-lspconfig are no longer required
           | thanks to the `vim.lsp.config`/`vim.lsp.enable` setup so you
           | don't need them unless you want the little bit of automagic
           | setup. Mason you can retain if you find it easier to install
           | LSP servers through it, otherwise you can drop that too.
           | Personally I manage my LSP tooling through distro/mise and
           | replaced the lspconfig plugins with just a few autocommands
           | and manually grabbing the config files from nvim-lspconfig
           | git repo as needed.
        
       | brcmthrowaway wrote:
       | I'm using VIM - Vi IMproved 9.1. What am I missing?
       | 
       | I'm kind of desperate to switch. Getting massive FOMO from
       | colleagues using VS Code. But I really like using the keyboard to
       | navigate. What should I do?
       | 
       | Does NeoVim support Claude Code?
        
         | wasabi991011 wrote:
         | If it's just using the keyboard that's holding you back from
         | VSCode, you'll be pleased to know it has plenty of its own
         | shortcuts, as well as a "VIM navigation" mode you can turn on.
        
           | brcmthrowaway wrote:
           | What do you use?
        
           | mathieudombrock wrote:
           | Vim mode in vscode is not even close to emulating a real
           | neovim setup.
        
             | maleldil wrote:
             | OP specifically mentioned "using keyboard to navigate". If
             | that's all you need, then VSCodeVim can get you pretty far.
        
         | lawn wrote:
         | What are you getting FOMO over? Been using Neovim since it
         | forked from Vim and I'm very happy with it.
         | 
         | Lua has been a big boon to advanced configuration and the
         | plugin ecosystem and Neovim supports everything I'd want and
         | more. LSP and treesitter for instance are still better handled
         | by Neovim.
         | 
         | If you dislike Lua (I'm not a fan) I recommend Fennel, but
         | either way it's much better than Vimscript.
         | 
         | As for Claude there are at least two Neovim plugins for it. I
         | use one of them and it works well but I can't remember which.
        
         | normie3000 wrote:
         | What's the FOMO caused by? Asking as a vim user starting to get
         | FOMOOFOMO.
        
         | pl-94 wrote:
         | I motivated my Cursor-colleagues to switch to tmux+nvim -- they
         | don't use it all the time, but they enjoy the vibe. Claude is
         | running on some tmux pans. Much nicer than VSCode!
        
         | johnsonjo wrote:
         | I've been using VIM/NVIM on and off for a while and the one
         | thing that made it stick for me over VSCode was LazyVim [1]. If
         | you're missing out on something IDE like VSCode, but you love
         | vim it's a great way to go (it can take some getting used to so
         | hang in there). EDIT LazyVim is based off nvim by the way. If
         | your more into videos to learn about something this is a good
         | intro to it from Elijah Manor [2]. I have my dotfiles stored on
         | github that I use on my different machines, and use gnu `stow`
         | and `make` to build them and that gives me my specific lazyvim
         | setup free and quickly after just downloading a few
         | dependencies.
         | 
         | [1]: https://www.lazyvim.org/ [2]: https://youtu.be/N93cTbtLCIM
        
           | robrain wrote:
           | To pile on to the LazyVim love, I recommend this site:
           | https://lazyvim-ambitious-devs.phillips.codes/
           | 
           | Course and book (free html, available pdf and dead tree).
           | Covers everything I've needed concisely.
        
         | NegativeLatency wrote:
         | Used neovim and neovide for the last week (also had FOMO) and
         | while they're good (no major gripes) I ended up going back to
         | macvim.
         | 
         | Are there specific features you're missing from vscode?
        
         | tekawade wrote:
         | You can use vim key binding in vs code.
        
         | sequin wrote:
         | Resist hypes and just use whatever you feel like. Torvalds uses
         | a 40 year old EMACS implementation and that seems to be working
         | for him.
        
         | scuff3d wrote:
         | Use the Neovim extension for VScode. It requires you to have
         | Neovim installed, but it works way better then the Vim
         | extension since it passes commands to neovim instead of using
         | emulation.
        
         | aldanor wrote:
         | Most of the active development in the ecosystem is done for
         | neovim these days. If you're using barebones vim then yea you
         | probably won't see much difference, otherwise you have no
         | choice
        
         | lachlan_gray wrote:
         | Ymmv, but I have been very happy using classic vim's "native
         | claude support"
         | 
         | :term claude
         | 
         | It will also expand special characters so you can do something
         | like
         | 
         | :term claude "refactor %"
         | 
         | And Claude starts work on your current file right away. Also
         | your buffers will update with Claude's edits!
        
         | shmerl wrote:
         | I switched from vim to neovim at the time when the former
         | didn't support true color themes and limited colors annoyed me.
         | neovim offered true color support in the terminal so I switched
         | and stayed with neovim since.
         | 
         | One major difference is neovim allowing to use Lua for
         | configuration and plugins. I find Lua to be neater than
         | vimscript.
        
         | kelnos wrote:
         | > _Does NeoVim support Claude Code?_
         | 
         | Why does it need to? Just open CC in another terminal window or
         | tab. Or run it in a split inside vim, using `:term`.
        
       | semiinfinitely wrote:
       | why put a built-in plugin manager. and if so why make it pack not
       | lazy
        
         | TymekDev wrote:
         | > The folke/lazy.nvim is the most used plugin manager at the
         | time of this writing. And rightly so: it is very capable with
         | lots of features. Ironically, this itself makes it not very
         | suitable to be a part of Neovim as most of the features come
         | with significant code and maintenance complexity. Plus the
         | whole idea of treating lazy loading as the main goal of a
         | plugin manager does not sit well with Neovim core team.
         | 
         | https://echasnovski.com/blog/2026-03-13-a-guide-to-vim-pack....
        
           | shmerl wrote:
           | I'd stick to lazy.nvim for now. Lazy loading is really neat
           | and lazy.nvim's ability to specify plugin dependencies isn't
           | something vim.pack has either.
           | 
           | I'd guess if you don't care about lazy loading and OK with
           | just loading everything all the time - vim.pack is great to
           | have as a built-in.
        
       | helterskelter wrote:
       | Up next for 0.13: multiple cursors! I have no idea what I'd do
       | with this feature but it sounds intriguing.
       | 
       | https://neovim.io/roadmap/
        
         | steve_adams_86 wrote:
         | I'm not sure how people typically use neovim, but in Zed I find
         | multiple cursors (especially combined with multiple file
         | buffers) extremely ergonomic for refactoring quickly and easily
         | where tools like find and replace or simple renaming doesn't
         | suffice. It lets you scan through and add cursors where you
         | need them, then perform your edits across locations and even
         | files all at once. It's so nice that it played a significant
         | role in me keeping Zed early on despite it missing a lot of
         | extensions I used in VS Code.
        
           | gesis wrote:
           | I am so used to sed-style, regex powered find/replace, that
           | this use admittedly never occured to me. As a result, multi-
           | cursor seemed mostly useless outside of pair programming that
           | I never do.
           | 
           | I will have to try it out once it lands in neovim just to see
           | if I can wrap my muscle memory around it.
        
             | runevault wrote:
             | For me the nice thing about multiple cursors is when it
             | would take more time to write the regex than it does to
             | just throw down say 8 cursors and update the spots.
        
               | skydhash wrote:
               | There's an overlap between "Find and Replace" and Macros,
               | but it's too small for multi cursors to be particularly
               | useful for me. Especially with emacs where I can bring up
               | all the lines in a separate buffer and edit them there
               | (occur-mode) or do the same for a set of files (grep-mode
               | and wgrep)
        
               | wredcoll wrote:
               | How do you place the cursors then?
        
               | hiccuphippo wrote:
               | In vim?
               | 
               | Ctrl+v, 8, j, shift+i, add the text, Esc.
               | 
               | Which works if you need to edit several aligned lines in
               | a row. The one thing I'm missing is putting the cursors
               | on the next found position of a search term which would
               | make it much more useful.
        
             | steve_adams_86 wrote:
             | I've always told myself I should learn to do these
             | sed/regex find and replace techniques, but my origins are
             | not sophisticated and I use computers like that orangutan
             | hammering nails in the video with David Attenborough
             | https://youtu.be/IFACrIx5SZ0?si=NcWGBNq272KoYB2i&t=84
             | 
             | It's entirely possible that you don't need multiple cursors
        
           | bluecalm wrote:
           | You have very convenient macros. If there is something you
           | want to do in places you are going to mark first then you can
           | just execute it right there instead. If it's just one edit
           | you just do it right there without macro and use the dot to
           | repeat it in more places.
           | 
           | If those places can be created automatically then again it's
           | just a macro you execute over many lines.
        
           | thiht wrote:
           | Not sure I under the Zed argument, VSCode has supported
           | milti-cursors since the very beginning. It was made popular
           | (not invented) by Sublime Text because it made it reaaaally
           | easy (middle click+drag), so Atom and VSCode carried the
           | feature.
        
         | scuff3d wrote:
         | It's funny because I miss this one all the time. I got use it
         | in Sublime and VScode before making the jump to Neovim. I know
         | you can get similar functionality from macros and what not, but
         | it's just not the same.
        
         | meekins wrote:
         | Really excited about this! At least in Sublime Text I've found
         | multiple cursors a really powerful tool for ad-hoc
         | transformations on snippets of semi-structured text or
         | instantly and visually applying the same edit on multiple
         | similar lines.
        
         | tekawade wrote:
         | Lookup helix tutorial. It's pretty useful.
        
         | Iridescent_ wrote:
         | Kakoune has replaced many features with multicursor, including
         | the sed-like commands (where you just select an area, search
         | for patterns inside it to create the multiple cursors, then
         | perform regular edits (which also means you can perform much
         | more complex than simple replaces). It is really useful for
         | refactors, e.g. even if you don't have any LSP (e.g. for plain
         | text) you can easily rename symbols, reorder/select in log
         | files, etc
        
         | w4rh4wk5 wrote:
         | Multi cursor support in VSCode replaced 98% of my need for
         | macros. Yes, macros are more powerful, but they are pretty easy
         | to get wrong. With multiple cursors, it's far easier to spot
         | where your inputs don't work out and adjust accordingly.
         | 
         | Multi cursor is the feature that increased my productivity the
         | most across the board.
        
           | skydhash wrote:
           | Proper macros are vim and emacs one. They have proper
           | movement shortcut that fits both code and prose.
           | 
           | Especially as code is formal notation, such that it's
           | structured quite rigidly, macros composition can be seen as a
           | meta language. Multi cursors is more suited for the "work
           | hard, not smart", like preferring litteral search instead of
           | learning regex.
        
           | cassepipe wrote:
           | Forget macros and multi-cursor. (Regex) substitutions from
           | vim's command line replaced 98% of my editing needs and
           | rendered a lot of my vim-fu useless.
           | 
           | (Just like searching with / replaced 98% of my navigation)
           | 
           | Editing something without having to actually place the cursor
           | anywhere is a killer feature
           | 
           | Also neovim can show you your substitutions live, no need for
           | a plugin anymore. It's the default.
        
             | cpill wrote:
             | Word Bro! Regex is so simple to read and easy to get
             | right... and its like if Immanuel Kant wrote find and
             | replace, yeah, learn a new language to do a single
             | function... yEAH! 98% Bro! I'd marry Regex if I could (but
             | if we got divorced it would be my exregex [which is almost
             | a palindrome!] Bro!)
        
             | mayli wrote:
             | Bro, not every guy/girl is a regex master, multi-cursor is
             | a much better UI/UX wysiwyg editor for everyday users.
        
           | latexr wrote:
           | Without meaning to sound like the "friendship ended" meme, I
           | was a heavy user of macros in vim and neovim. It was probably
           | my favourite feature. After I switched to Helix, I began
           | using multiple cursors and now those are my favourite
           | feature, I barely use macros anymore. Being able to see your
           | movements live and intelligently using multiple clipboard is
           | not just powerful, it's fun too and rewards well-designed
           | code.
        
         | themadsens wrote:
         | Whats with all the fuss over multicursor. How is this different
         | from just using '.'
        
           | wilkystyle wrote:
           | dot repeat is the wrong comparison. A closer one would be
           | macros, but even then a good multiple cursors implementation
           | is often faster, more intuitive, and requires less cognitive
           | overhead. One of the better examples of the usefulness of
           | multiple cursors is from Emacs Rocks (link goes to 0:23):
           | 
           | https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jNa3axo40qM&t=23s
        
             | camgunz wrote:
             | What do you when the things you want to change don't all
             | fit on the screen at once?
        
               | luxurytent wrote:
               | You do a search/replace which has a similar function,
               | although applied differently.
        
               | wilkystyle wrote:
               | At least in e.g. Emacs and sublime text, you can mark all
               | occurrences throughout the entire file. Assuming the
               | matches are similar enough that the same motions apply
               | even if you can't see the cursor, you can perform those
               | operations.
               | 
               | Otherwise, as a sibling comment said, incremental
               | search/replace is your friend.
        
         | eviks wrote:
         | You'd do text editing with it with the coolest feedback loop -
         | immediately seeing the changes and what those changes apply to
         | beforehand, that's different from having to repeat some macro
         | multiple times
        
           | dizhn wrote:
           | Highlighted search/replace does this pretty well too.
        
         | andrepd wrote:
         | Multiple cursors were the killer feature that got me to start
         | using Sublime Text back in ~2010. Still an absolute staple of
         | my text editing toolbox. Ctrl-D Ctrl-D Ctrl-D ...
        
         | qiine wrote:
         | "Image API: vim.ui.img"
         | 
         | Oh neat!
        
         | natas wrote:
         | one cursor for you one cursor for claude code :)
        
         | luxurytent wrote:
         | LLMs: Look, I can write code! neovim users: hold my beer,
         | multicursor is here!
        
         | alwillis wrote:
         | Looking forward to multiple cursors... but Vim/Neovim can
         | already do some of the common use-cases for multiple cursors,
         | like prepending (or appending) text to a bunch of lines using
         | visual block mode [1].
         | 
         | Here's a video example [2]:
         | 
         | [1]: https://neovim.io/doc/user/usr_10/#_visual-block-mode
         | 
         | [2]:
         | https://www.reddit.com/r/vim/comments/jai57c/the_usefulness_...
        
       | semiinfinitely wrote:
       | the zig build system is the only thing that actually matters in
       | these notes. nobody maintains a parallel build system for fun--
       | it's a clear signal they're finally pathfinding a way to migrate
       | the core away from legacy c. zig's native interop is basically
       | the only way to do this incrementally without the massive
       | friction of a full rust rewrite. definitely makes nvim feel like
       | a much more serious environment for systems-level performance
       | work.
        
         | mihaelm wrote:
         | It doesn't necessarily mean they're going to migrate from C,
         | building a C project is just so much nicer with Zig than
         | fiddling around with CMake. You got people using it as a build
         | system even for Go projects, especially if they're relying on
         | CGo.
         | 
         | However, if you were entertaining the idea of slowly switching
         | to Zig, the build system would be the place to start. Moving
         | away from CMake is worth it even if you don't push it further.
         | 
         | But yeah, the C-Zig interop story is so good it's a no brainer
         | if you want to "modernize" your C codebase, and you can do so
         | incrementally instead of stopping the world for a rewrite.
        
         | tovej wrote:
         | Couldn't disagree more. Why move away from solid, mature build
         | systems to something relatively fringe like zig.
         | 
         | Sadly, this is the general trend with neovim in general: less
         | focus on stability, more and more focus on shiny new things. If
         | I didn't have an nvim config that I'm used to I would have
         | switched to plain vim ages ago.
        
         | metaltyphoon wrote:
         | > the only way to do this incrementally without the massive
         | friction of a full rust rewrite
         | 
         | Any rewrite is massive friction, I'm sure probably meant port?
         | The only annoyance with Rust ports is if you have to support
         | varargs. Hopefully that will come to an end soon.
        
       | toisanji wrote:
       | Is anyone using them vim with Claude or any of these coding
       | tools? I want to, but I haven't found a good workflow.
        
         | OliverWich wrote:
         | Sidekick.nvim is nice, you get a "real" terminal window on the
         | side with many different agents to choose from.
         | 
         | Either opencode, claude, gemini, copilot, basically most that
         | are relevant :D
         | 
         | Its a pretty light connection-layer, so it helps with sending
         | context.
        
           | thayne wrote:
           | FWIW, it's also made by Folke, the same developer who made
           | lazy.nvim and snacks.nvim, as well as some other high-quality
           | plugins.
        
         | lachlan_gray wrote:
         | Mentioned elsewhere, but
         | 
         | :term claude
         | 
         | In a split goes a long way for me!
        
         | Zizizizz wrote:
         | Yes tab split, neovim on the left, companion on the right, or
         | different tabs. The plugin codecompanion.nvim is also great. I
         | use it for common tasks. Like:
         | 
         | vaf (visual around function) <space>ad (leader key add
         | docstring).
         | 
         | And it documents the functions with my system prompt
         | instructions for what good docstings should look like.
        
         | mathieudombrock wrote:
         | CodeCompanion.nvim is a pretty nice plugin. I use that for
         | quick stuff and opencode in the embedded terminal for larger
         | tasks.
        
         | altermetax wrote:
         | Just open a terminal split/tab and use claude there. The neovim
         | buffer will update real-time.
        
         | kelnos wrote:
         | I just have vim open in one terminal tab and Claude Code open
         | in another terminal tab. Works great.
        
       | jauntywundrkind wrote:
       | I've been loving NeoVim with AstroNvim so much. I'd done some
       | editor configuration and it felt daunting and mostly just...
       | didn't. And I was not good about using the leader key, because of
       | tmux to zellij problems, that nothing was discoverable (zellij
       | adds visual overlays to guide you through usage, unlike tmux's
       | memorize everything approach). AstroNvim has changed both of
       | these so much for me: there's excellent community packs
       | (https://github.com/AstroNvim/astrocommunity) that are easy to
       | drop in that have good configuration out of the box for
       | everything you could want to do, and the leader key has a
       | wonderful little bottom-of-screen UI for itself that helps you
       | discover what's available (that astronvim plugins naturally
       | grow/augment).
       | 
       | On Neovim, very exciting and interesting to see 0.12.0. It'll be
       | interesting to see if folks really do migrating and at what speed
       | to the new built-in plugin system. There's still dozens of other
       | still used plugin systems, but LazyVim seems to have really
       | cemented itself as the lead (and is used in AstroNvim). It feels
       | like vim-pack is trying to be lighter still. Will it work? Will
       | it get adopted? Will be neat to see. PR for vim-pack:
       | https://github.com/neovim/neovim/pull/34009
       | 
       | Last, I still dream of a day where neovim headless is capable of
       | running multiple different clients at once. The rpc architecture
       | is so powerful and so amazing. But we're still (afaik) anchored
       | to having once canonical screen, where-as I want to be able to
       | have multiple editors, looking at different views of the
       | workspace, with different layouts, and specialty windows like IDE
       | debuggers in their own layouts. It's hard to dream of neovim
       | disaggregating itself, blowing up the screen.c, but maybe maybe
       | maybe maybe some decade, possibly, I hope.
        
       | shmerl wrote:
       | Congrats on diff mode improvements. Hopefully forge style
       | highlighting mode for two way diffs will be available next.
        
       | nickandbro wrote:
       | If anybody wants to checkout my site to learn the basics of vim.
       | Here it is:
       | 
       | https://vimgolf.ai
       | 
       | I proxy to neovim instances for each level. Still working out
       | some kinks but soon to complete it
        
         | awesan wrote:
         | Seems like you need an account just to try it.
        
           | nickandbro wrote:
           | Yeah working on a smart way to rate limit stale requests for
           | those who don't have accounts.But the final version will
           | allow anybody who is not a bot, to get into a vim instance
           | without logging in. Thanks for the feedback.
        
       | imjonse wrote:
       | It probably goes against Vim tradition, culture and freedom to
       | choose, but I wish they added even more built-in features (like
       | Helix) that are currently implemented in competing and sometimes
       | brittle plugins and have to be put together into also competing
       | vim starter packs and distros of plugins and config files just to
       | have a modern setup out of the box.
        
         | skydhash wrote:
         | Define "modern"!
         | 
         | Almost all such complaints are close to "I want to be cool and
         | be seen as an haxor, but all I know is a bit of VSCode and
         | IDEA, make it easier for me, plz".
        
           | Sayrus wrote:
           | I think what they did with first-party support for LSP would
           | be an example of this.
           | 
           | However, Neovim explicitely states that they don't want to
           | turn VIM into an IDE. The feature parent is talking about
           | seem to be falling into that type of vertical integration
           | instead of composability.
        
         | augusto-moura wrote:
         | I believe neovim started as a fork specifically to implement
         | features like LSP support and package management, VIM
         | eventually also caught up. But i don't believe anything is out
         | of the table, or against Vim tradition. Which features do you
         | want to see built-in, specifically?
        
           | QuantumNomad_ wrote:
           | I'm also pretty sure that on an episode of The Standup, one
           | of the Neovim core maintainers TJ DeVries (Teej) said that it
           | is a good idea to prove new ideas in the form of a plugin
           | rather than submitting pull requests for Neovim itself with
           | new ideas that have not yet been tested out and proven in the
           | real world. Implicitly implying that indeed Neovim is open to
           | bring features from plugins into core Neovim itself, if they
           | are proven to be useful for a lot of people.
           | 
           | Unfortunately I don't remember what episode it was or even if
           | it was specifically on an episode of The Standup, or if it
           | was some other video that he and ThePrimagen did outside of
           | The Standup.
        
           | aidos wrote:
           | Multi threading, but yeah.
           | 
           | Original HN post here if you're interested.
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7279358
        
         | lawn wrote:
         | Neovim is actively moving in that direction.
        
         | gorjusborg wrote:
         | I agree in principle that absorbing the best from the ecosystem
         | is good. However, anything pulled into core should have a long
         | lifetime and be considered part of the API. This deserves
         | careful consideration, and plugins work really well until it is
         | clear there is a reason to pull something in.
        
           | Blackthorn wrote:
           | Not to talk about the other side of the holy war too much,
           | but one of the things I appreciate about GNU ELPA is it's
           | treated as part of the Emacs distribution and needs to follow
           | all the rules of Emacs proper as a result.
        
         | bheadmaster wrote:
         | This is what happened with the Language Server Protocol.
         | 
         | Prior to 0.9 (if I recall correctly), you had to install a
         | plugin to be able to interface with LSP servers, and in 0.9
         | they integrated the support into NeoVim itself.
        
           | shmerl wrote:
           | Would be nice to also have such support for DAP, though nvim-
           | dap is doing a good job so far.
        
       | butterlesstoast wrote:
       | With all the supply chain attacks this last week, little hesitant
       | to upgrade.
        
       | 0x696C6961 wrote:
       | The built-in incremental ast based visual selection is nice.
        
       | nixpulvis wrote:
       | My #1 issue with Neovim is the new ! Behavior. Anyone know how to
       | make it toggle the alt terminal screen and just output to the
       | primary screen like it does in Vim?
        
       | throw567643u8 wrote:
       | With its own package manager now, and LSP library, you really
       | don't need a lot of config tweaking for a minimal vim setup these
       | days.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2026-03-29 23:00 UTC)