vim-win32-installer VS busybox-w32

There are official 64-bit Windows builds, you can find them here, for example: https://github.com/vim/vim-win32-installer/releases

I have no idea, but why wait? There's nothing tricky about installing nightly (I called them current in my original reply) versions. Here's a link to a Windows executable. https://github.com/vim/vim-win32-installer/releases

gVim

This is with gvim builds from vim-win32-installer?

This is already part of the official Vim (through the patches). The various Linux distributions and MacOS ship Vim with various patches. So this will be available whenever these distributions decide to include this patch. If you want to use the latest Vim without waiting for the official distribution, you can download it from: Windows: https://github.com/vim/vim-win32-installer/releases MacOS: https://github.com/macvim-dev/macvim/releases Linux: You can build the latest sources.

You can install the latest Vim release from https://github.com/vim/vim-win32-installer/releases. This installation includes vim.exe (terminal Vim for MS-Windows).

Yes, filesystem redirections are generally in place for 32-bit programs on 64-bit Windows. Another option instead of using sysnative is to install the 64-bit version of vim. That's what I do anyway. You can get it at https://github.com/vim/vim-win32-installer/releases and download the 64-bit versions.

Windows Releases: https://github.com/vim/vim-win32-installer/releases/tag/v9.0.0000

Even in environments such as win32, we have https://frippery.org/busybox/ that is just fucking awesome. Staying the size below an 1mb while being extremely fast. Unlike the shitty python package which has 40mb archive size and leave breadcrumbs for me to cleanup all over my filesystem.

Win32 port is here: https://frippery.org/busybox/

Look into busybox for windows https://frippery.org/busybox/. Pretty bad ass even with it’s downsides of missing applets and such

Vim by itself means no supporting unix environment. It's useful to call out to powerful external tools not present by default on Windows. I fill that gap with busybox-w32. It's not a big deal once solved.

Sure, it's not necessary, but a few simple, nice tools (<600kiB for an entire suite of extended unix utilities) makes thing a whole lot simpler on a platform devoid of nice tools.

To operate on many files you'll need better tools than what Windows gives you. One option is busybox-w32 (important caveat: doesn't support unicode paths), which will get you some basic command line tools. For example, to gzip compress every file under the current directory, including subdirectories (leaving the originals behind with -k):

busybox-w32 includes a cal applet. If that's all you care about, you can just rename busybox.exe to cal.exe.

busybox-w32: standard unix utilities for Windows. It's a BusyBox port.

IHMO, even better is to just use POSIX sh in your Makefile and simply make it a build requirement. It's easy to obtain a reasonable sh even on Windows (Cygwin, MSYS2, busybox-w32), and to further support exactly this I include sh alongside make in my development kit distribution. This uniformity lets me hit all operating systems with the same Makefile. I use EXE from the environment to determine the binary file extension, if any.