Thread

1. gavinhoward · 1790522634 · focus · HN ↗

   As a Neovim user, this stopped me dead with painful realization: I may have suffered the same thing but didn't realize it. There was a time when I could not undo something, and it was after a Neovim upgrade.

   Unlike Dr. Chisnall, I started my editor journey on Neovim, so it wasn't a transition that bit me. However, if the format of the persistent undo file is unstable, and Neovim just deletes it when it doesn't recognize the previous format, then it seems conceivable (to me) that an upgrade after changing the format would delete the file too.

   Ouch. This is making me think about getting off of Neovim. Yes, FOSS comes as-is, but if there's an alternative...

   1. cdmckay · 1790526672 · focus · HN ↗

      It’s such an odd design decision.

      I could see ignoring the old undo data or warning before discarding it but just silently wiping it is so user hostile it’s hard to comprehend.

      1. 59percentmore · 1790537955 · focus · HN ↗

         It's some sort of industry standard, though, isn't it? Google Chrome on Android auto-deletes the history database silently if it deems it corrupted (e.g., due to a bad write on a system with low storage). You just open your browser one day and it's all gone.

         If not, I wonder how Google justifies it.

         1. jwr · 1790539584 · focus · HN ↗

            Google is the epitome of design that doesn't care at all about the user and user experience.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.