3 ms·
Not really... IMO whats far more hilarious is to see an editor written in Java handily beat the newer editors like Atom, Code, etc.
by agentgt 9y ago
Not really... IMO whats far more hilarious is to see an editor written in Java handily beat the newer editors like Atom, Code, etc.
- throwaway91111 9y agoWell Atom, Code etc are written in javascript; i would wholly expect an editor written in java run laps around them.
- agentgt 9y agoWell that is sort of like saying Emacs is written in Elisp. Its true a good portion of the editors are written in their own scripting language (js for atom, and elisp for emacs, and beanshell for jedit) but I believe the critical components that these tests test for are probably not.
- throwaway91111 9y agoRight, i guess that was my point as well. The java factor probably doesn't play into the core speed. I would imagine the rendering is what screws the performance for the js based editors.
- btym 9y agoThink carefully about what you just posted. Java has to load the JVM. Atom and VS Code have to load Chromium.
- agentgt 9y agoOf course I know they load up a web browser but you would think that is something what Java people would do (in terms of over engineering and over use frameworks and fair game as I'm a Java developer). I'm basing this on the original poster that thought it was funny that Emacs is fast/small. You don't think its ironic that a Java editor is small and fast given its history of being slow and bloated?