3 ms·

That is provably false.

• anonymoushn 4y ago
  Do you mean "people still use VSCode even though many interactions have unnecessarily high latency" or "people's experience using VSCode would not be improved by the elimination of these latencies?" Can you post the proof you are referring to? Here's some article about this topic: https://www.gigaspaces.com/blog/amazon-found-every-100ms-of-latency-cost-them-1-in-sales https://www.gigaspaces.com/blog/amazon-found-every-100ms-of-...
  • ZephyrBlu 4y ago
    The former. > Can you post the proof you are referring to? The fact that applications which use 50M cycles to render text boxes exist and are very popular is proof in itself. There is not a significant difference in the product if it uses 10M cycles (Or even less) vs 50M, as long as it is fast enough.
    • anonymoushn 4y ago
      Right, everyone will use applications that are unbearably slow when there are no alternatives, and that's why we should not try to make applications that run at reasonable speeds.
      • joshmanders 4y ago
        You realize that the example you used is the top used tool in it's field and that field is littered with tools that have existed longer and are arguably faster? You know why VSCode is the leader? The tradeoffs of a little latency that can be annoying but mostly is unnoticeable is acceptable for all the added benefits the editor gives us.