4 ms·

Any sufficiently complicated Vim configuration contains an ad hoc, informally-specified, bug-ridden, slow implementation of half of Emacs.

AlchemistCamp 3y ago
And its half doesn’t include the repetitive stress injuries ;)
maleldil 3y ago
> slow There's quite a good chance that even the most complicated Neovim setup is faster than Emacs. Emacs lisp is notoriously slow, while Neovim uses LuaJIT, which is _very_ fast.
- bitwize 3y ago
  Emacs Lisp had native-comp now.
- nequo 3y ago
  How do Neovim and Emacs startup times compare when using Emacs 28’s native compilation of elisp? Obviously hard to compare because they don’t run the same packages but would still be interesting to see ballpark figures of setups with roughly equivalent functionality.
  - hetman 3y ago
    Are these startup times even significant enough to actually be noticeable anyway?
    - bjoli 3y ago
      If people are bothered by Emacs startup times they usually just use Emacs Daemon. I let systemd start it for me at boop, for example.
  - bjoli 3y ago
    Not favourably to Emacs.
- chlorion 3y ago
  Emacs now has an optimizing native code emitting compiler for elisp. It's definitely not slow, but not as fast a luajit. Not sure why performance matters in this case anyways though.
avbanks 3y ago
A few years ago I would have hated you for this comment but after switching to Emacs, this comment is actually spot on.
- hetman 3y ago
  I don't like Emacs and still thought it was funny :)