3 ms·
Unless they start using native code it will always be like that.
by randomsofr 10y ago
Unless they start using native code it will always be like that.
- kaeluka 10y agoI went back to (non-native) emacs, partially due to this problem.
- coldtea 10y agoEmacs has tons of C code. And the display (and core text manipulation stuff IIRC) is not written in elisp. In contrast, Atom just uses native code as the JIT, and then not only does (almost) everything in JS but also renders it with slow DOM.
- moosingin3space 10y agoI'm looking forward to Guile Emacs, if it ever gets merged into mainline, because emacs will then have a JIT (and maybe we can then land things like real threads)
- halokonrad 10y agoVSCode from Microsoft is also wrapped in electron and uses a fraction of what Atom is consuming. Not being native has nothing to do here.
- PSeitz 10y agoThe memory consumption is a magnitude larger in JavaScript than native. http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64/compare.php?lang=v8&lang2=gcc http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64/compare.php?lang...
- philtar 10y agoSo what? There are javascript editors that don't use as much memory as atom. What you're saying is irrelevant.
- PSeitz 10y agoSo if this is hard to understand, the conclusion, in simple words: the memory consumption for a javascript editor will be a magnitude bigger than native. In my example 66Mb Sublime vs 620MB VS Code (no plugins)
- philtar 10y agohalokonrad isn't talking about sublime. He's talking about Atom vs VS Code.