I'm a professional PHP, Python and Javascript developer from the UK. I've worked with Django, Laravel, and React, among others. I also maintain a legacy Zend 1 application.
Neovim always has the terminal - there's no question of it needing to be compiled in explicitly, so you will never be caught by your Linux distro not compiling it in.
The Python API client is the reference implementation, but since it's RPC based it's language agnostic, and there are a wide range of clients.
I'm a professional PHP, Python and Javascript developer from the UK. I've worked with Django, Laravel, and React, among others. I also maintain a legacy Zend 1 application.
I never had the problem of having to use Linux (or even one special Linux) for anything - but I doubt that the client disapproves having a compiler installed.
(Chances are that the "huge Vim" of the specific distro has terminal support anyway.)
I'm a professional PHP, Python and Javascript developer from the UK. I've worked with Django, Laravel, and React, among others. I also maintain a legacy Zend 1 application.
It probably does in most cases, but because Neovim doesn't require stuff like that to be specifically enabled, you can guarantee it's there.
Ultimately the presence of Neovim is undoubtedly a good thing. It provides an alternative to Vim that's extremely easy to migrate to seamlessly. Also, the mere fact that it exists has spurred development along similar lines - Vim has been adding features that were pioneered by Neovim, so even if you stick with Vim you'll see some benefit.
I've been a professional C, Perl, PHP and Python developer.
I'm an ex-sysadmin from the late 20th century.
These days I do more Javascript and CSS and whatnot, and promote UX and accessibility.
I'm a professional PHP, Python and Javascript developer from the UK. I've worked with Django, Laravel, and React, among others. I also maintain a legacy Zend 1 application.
Vim supports Tcl, Python 2/3, Perl, Ruby and Racket. Is that not enough for you?
So does Vim (when compiled with
+terminal).Neovim always has the terminal - there's no question of it needing to be compiled in explicitly, so you will never be caught by your Linux distro not compiling it in.
The Python API client is the reference implementation, but since it's RPC based it's language agnostic, and there are a wide range of clients.
That's a solvable problem...
Not really. What if you have to use a specific distro on a server due to client requirements? Happened to me this year.
I never had the problem of having to use Linux (or even one special Linux) for anything - but I doubt that the client disapproves having a compiler installed.
(Chances are that the "huge Vim" of the specific distro has terminal support anyway.)
It probably does in most cases, but because Neovim doesn't require stuff like that to be specifically enabled, you can guarantee it's there.
Ultimately the presence of Neovim is undoubtedly a good thing. It provides an alternative to Vim that's extremely easy to migrate to seamlessly. Also, the mere fact that it exists has spurred development along similar lines - Vim has been adding features that were pioneered by Neovim, so even if you stick with Vim you'll see some benefit.
I've also yet to do anything in vim where I thought, "I wish this terminal I'm using was inside my text editor"
I'm told the typical use case is a REPL, which makes sense to me, but haven't had the occasion to try it