>>31 neovim is philosophically opposed to what made vim good. may as well use emacs evil mode. lua is "better" than vimscript. but vim is only good when you use as few extensions as possible (ideally vanilla with a small init script to make change some default options based on use, ie show/hide line numbers). so if making it easier to add extensions with better scripting is the direction the result is emacs again. and elisp is better than lua. emacs has better built in documentation. emacs has more extensions. etc. if you are using vanilla neovim, there's literally no reason not to just use vim instead.
that said. vi is even better. anyone who 'needs' syntax highlighting is weak. it was the first mistake made by the tool devs, only surpassed in it's stupidity by autocomplete (ie tag commplete / intellisense/ etc)
neovim is philosophically opposed to what made vim good.
may as well use emacs evil mode. lua is "better" than vimscript. but vim is only good when you use as few extensions as possible (ideally vanilla with a small init script to make change some default options based on use, ie show/hide line numbers). so if making it easier to add extensions with better scripting is the direction the result is emacs again. and elisp is better than lua. emacs has better built in documentation. emacs has more extensions. etc. if you are using vanilla neovim, there's literally no reason not to just use vim instead.
that said. vi is even better. anyone who 'needs' syntax highlighting is weak. it was the first mistake made by the tool devs, only surpassed in it's stupidity by autocomplete (ie tag commplete / intellisense/ etc)