Everything works just like it's supposed to. In fact sometimes I get neovim instead of vim (when I run "vi" from the shell) and I don't even notice.
I have a fairly simple vim config.
I'm sure this means that I'm missing out on all the great new things about neovim, and maybe I'll get there some day. But I am happy with how vi/vim/neovim work reliably and consistently every time.
As a counter-counterpoint: I tried switching to neovim a couple of weeks ago, and gave up after half a day trying to get syntax highlighting working.
plugin-baby: (complicated setup?) I see errors
worksonmine: WFM
My vim config is simple, and neovim handles it well. Including syntax highlighting (some custom). I don't like some of the defaults as much as what shipped with vim, but I know I could configure them out if I cared enough.
Why do you use neovim when it sounds like you’re marginally less happy with it?
I don't use neovim, per se.
But sometimes when I run "vi" on one of the various systems I frequent, neovim is what I get.
It doesn't break any of the config I've set explicitly, and doesn't give me wildly unexpected settings aside from that, so I'm good. :)
There are different defaults for the pane management and the terminal. The vim defaults, IMO, allow a more consistent user experience. E.g. when you are in a vim terminal and you go to normal mode to yank some stuff to put it in the other pane with the code, nvim defaults adds line numbers to the terminal that need to be cleaned up afterwards, vim just does not add them. This is just one small example, but there are several edge cases where the vim defaults behave like I would expect and nvim either does something unexpected or it lags or it crashes.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but the Nvim terminal does not do this, at least by default (maybe some plugin enables this "feature"). If you yank some text from a terminal buffer in Nvim and paste it into another buffer with p, no line numbers are added.