well the library ecosystem, developer tooling, and gradual typing support for lua is far ahead of what’s available for vimscript. in my experience lua is #2 behind javascript/typescript’s #1 when it comes to scripting language LSP stuff. both python and ruby suffer from a profusion of alternative type checkers and whatnot that cause pain and fragmentation when it comes to tooling.

it’s pretty great to have my vimconfig give red squiggle in editor if i’m doing it wrong before i save & reload.

but i’ve not followed vim9 script as its evolved perhaps there’s a good type checker for it at this point?

even before neovim, there were vim extensions written in lua so it feels gravity of lua code has been considerable for a long time.

to me vim9script feels like perl5/raku split - evolution too late to grow new users, a remnant for a niche that will fade to oblivion slowly over the next 10 years.

▲

toxik 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Oh man imagine if NeoVim had been TypeScript. I would've switched then.

	▲	arccy an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		neovim does have some support for nodejs plugins through its providers https://neovim.io/doc/user/provider.html#_node.js-integratio...
	▲	jitl 5 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		well the lua setup has enough type checker going on that’s it’s really useful, besides language familiarity i honestly don’t miss much; there’s great docs and autocomplete for the lua stuff built in to the lazynvim distro.

▲

skydhash 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

With vim9, just like C and perl, the focus is to write small programs. And you don't need a typechecker if your program is only a few hundreds lines. And locality of behavior is at most one screen tall. For scripting languages, I'd rather a good documentation system (vim, emacs,..) than having a full lsp client in the background.