Drastic proposal: rename eruby to rhtml to make way for an HTML free eruby filetype

Tim Pope vim-ruby-devel at tpope.info
Fri Mar 9 10:47:38 EST 2007

The subject says it all.  The most common use of eruby is filling out
HTML templates, but this is by no means the only use.  I think it
would be a good idea to have an rhtml filetype for html templates, and
an eruby filetype for everything else.  There is precedent for this
elsewhere:  Vim has a django filetype for Django templates and
apparently will be getting a separate djangohtml filetype.

I am well aware that changing filetypes around is not something to be
taken lightly.  I would anticipate phasing this in over a couple of
*Vim* releases.  I have no intention of even starting such a
transition until Vim 7.1 draws nearer.  At this point, I'm looking for
objections other than "this would be hard to do."  If there were
no technical or backwards compatibility restrictions, and such a
change could be made with zero side-effects, would anybody disagree
with such a change?

An alternative to this is to have a new filetype for eruby files
without HTML.  Something like plaineruby or erubytext.  This would
work but it makes me cringe, much like the tex filetype being LaTeX
and the plaintex filetype being TeX.  I'd like to make my proposed
change while Vim support for eruby is still young and evolving.

Once again, I'm looking for idealistic objections at this point rather
than practical ones.  Does anyone object to the idea of two filetypes,
or of my suggested naming scheme?


More information about the vim-ruby-devel mailing list