4 ms·

- fast loading (vscode loads much faster on my computer; specially if I have a lot of open files) - code "peek" (that little windows is super useful) - good i

by wiz21c 3y ago

- fast loading (vscode loads much faster on my computer; specially if I have a lot of open files) - code "peek" (that little windows is super useful) - good integration with debugger (again, vscode kills it here). For example: how to look a at a numpy array in emacs (in vscode there's a data viewer for that) - robust LSP (for example, when I complete a formatting string f"{... on a big file, emacs simply becomes unresponsive for a minute or so (it's much quicker ona powerful computer though); pylance is simply superior on edge cases. But although I'm a long time emacs user, there's one thngs where VSCode is much better, it's discoverability. I've learned much of what I need in 2-3 weeks, without ever looking at a manual. Note: I'm a regular emacs user since since about 10 years (I came for the freedom, stayed for the community). I'm using VSCode since about a year. I'll be happy to ear a way to make my emacs better.

natrys 3y ago
Doom Emacs loads very fast so theoretically it's possible to configure Emacs to be fast too (mine starts in a second, cold start is a little slower). But I think most people don't care about it enough because they either never close Emacs and/or use it in server-mode where emacsclient is pretty much instantaneous. Can I ask why you don't like doing that?
- wiz21c 3y ago
  Because I conserve energy: I turn my PC off at the end of each session (so about one/two times a day). And because the "sleep" mode is not reliable (I have a 14 years old PC, upgraded in RAM and GPU and SDD; and here I conserve hardware). So having things take time on start up is an annoyance to me (but I live with it, I was just saying that emacs is slower than VSCode)
  - hsbauauvhabzb 3y ago
    So your point is that emacs is slow on slow hardware? I’m sure vscode would chew through resources during a heavy session, have you benchmarked more than just the startup of the application?
    - wiz21c 3y ago
      my overall feeling on my own (slow) PC is that VSCode is faster on load (or, to be exact, I perceive it be to be faster) and provides a few features that I don't have on emacs. You're right: once VSCode is in memory I think it uses more of it. But that's barely nothing when compared to rust-analyzer (which emacs LSP uses too).
- phforms 3y ago
  I use Doom Emacs with the Yamamoto port of Emacs [1] on MacOS (M1) and the startup time is quite slow: it takes around 6-7 sec. for the editor window to show up. It doesn’t bother me too much since I usually start it once a day and just never close it, as you mentioned. However, I also have many plugins installed, so it might be just that. I wonder if it is possible to install a separate instance of Emacs, then I would be able to test the performance without all the plugins and configuration. [1]: https://github.com/railwaycat/homebrew-emacsmacport https://github.com/railwaycat/homebrew-emacsmacport
PaulDavisThe1st 3y ago
> - fast loading (vscode loads much faster on my computer; specially if I have a lot of open files) who ever does such a thing? Emacs starts up on my machine soon after I login. It remains open until I logout. Current instance has 123 buffers (files). Loading speed just isn't important to me as a full-time native (C++) developer. > - robust LSP I tried LSP a bit. Gave up because it just didn't really help me with my actual work. Could understand why someone with less experience programming would find it helpful, but it just wasn't so for me (I use emacs dynamic completion a lot)
- gumbojuice 3y ago
  Emacs on my system is ~8sec load time, vs ~5sec load time for Code. I have not optimized either (but I have decided on using Straight as package manager on Emacs, which is arguably faster than the built-in). I use LSP a lot (through eglot with Emacs-29). For each "mode" in Emacs there are alternatives to LSP, mostly what was there before LSP, which may be equally good. However, I found that switching to LSP simplified my setup, and having the same functionality/keybindings between modes is great, e.g. my projects switch me between Python, Rust, and Java, earlier that was basically three different "IDEs", while today they're very similar.
  - PaulDavisThe1st 3y ago
    > Emacs on my system is ~8sec load time, vs ~5sec load time for Code yeah, but i don't give a damn. I do this once every few weeks. ps. also, emacs is < 3 secs on my system, so even if i did care ...
  - vinceguidry 3y ago
    Run emacs as a server when you start the machine and use emacsclient to connect with it. Way faster start times.
- wiz21c 3y ago
  What is "dynamic completion" ?
craftkiller 3y ago
Emacs has code peek. With lsp-mode it has that little window: https://emacs-lsp.github.io/lsp-ui/#lsp-ui-peek https://emacs-lsp.github.io/lsp-ui/#lsp-ui-peek Personally I use eglot with consult which temporarily switches the entire buffer to do the "peek" functionality rather than popping up a tiny window: https://github.com/minad/consult https://github.com/minad/consult
goku12 3y ago
I wonder why everyone's having such long startup time for emacs - like 6 to 8 seconds. Mine has a lot of add-on packages and it still manages to start up in 2 seconds (It's a server. So that happens only once in a session). I haven't done much optimization either - unless you count a lot of autoloads that you automatically get with use-package.

by wiz21c 3y ago

natrys 3y ago

Doom Emacs loads very fast so theoretically it's possible to configure Emacs to be fast too (mine starts in a second, cold start is a little slower). But I think most people don't care about it enough because they either never close Emacs and/or use it in server-mode where emacsclient is pretty much instantaneous. Can I ask why you don't like doing that?

wiz21c 3y ago
Because I conserve energy: I turn my PC off at the end of each session (so about one/two times a day). And because the "sleep" mode is not reliable (I have a 14 years old PC, upgraded in RAM and GPU and SDD; and here I conserve hardware). So having things take time on start up is an annoyance to me (but I live with it, I was just saying that emacs is slower than VSCode)
- hsbauauvhabzb 3y ago
  So your point is that emacs is slow on slow hardware? I’m sure vscode would chew through resources during a heavy session, have you benchmarked more than just the startup of the application?
  - wiz21c 3y ago
    my overall feeling on my own (slow) PC is that VSCode is faster on load (or, to be exact, I perceive it be to be faster) and provides a few features that I don't have on emacs. You're right: once VSCode is in memory I think it uses more of it. But that's barely nothing when compared to rust-analyzer (which emacs LSP uses too).
phforms 3y ago
I use Doom Emacs with the Yamamoto port of Emacs [1] on MacOS (M1) and the startup time is quite slow: it takes around 6-7 sec. for the editor window to show up. It doesn’t bother me too much since I usually start it once a day and just never close it, as you mentioned. However, I also have many plugins installed, so it might be just that. I wonder if it is possible to install a separate instance of Emacs, then I would be able to test the performance without all the plugins and configuration. [1]: https://github.com/railwaycat/homebrew-emacsmacport https://github.com/railwaycat/homebrew-emacsmacport

PaulDavisThe1st 3y ago

> - fast loading (vscode loads much faster on my computer; specially if I have a lot of open files) who ever does such a thing? Emacs starts up on my machine soon after I login. It remains open until I logout. Current instance has 123 buffers (files). Loading speed just isn't important to me as a full-time native (C++) developer. > - robust LSP I tried LSP a bit. Gave up because it just didn't really help me with my actual work. Could understand why someone with less experience programming would find it helpful, but it just wasn't so for me (I use emacs dynamic completion a lot)

gumbojuice 3y ago
Emacs on my system is ~8sec load time, vs ~5sec load time for Code. I have not optimized either (but I have decided on using Straight as package manager on Emacs, which is arguably faster than the built-in). I use LSP a lot (through eglot with Emacs-29). For each "mode" in Emacs there are alternatives to LSP, mostly what was there before LSP, which may be equally good. However, I found that switching to LSP simplified my setup, and having the same functionality/keybindings between modes is great, e.g. my projects switch me between Python, Rust, and Java, earlier that was basically three different "IDEs", while today they're very similar.
- PaulDavisThe1st 3y ago
  > Emacs on my system is ~8sec load time, vs ~5sec load time for Code yeah, but i don't give a damn. I do this once every few weeks. ps. also, emacs is < 3 secs on my system, so even if i did care ...
- vinceguidry 3y ago
  Run emacs as a server when you start the machine and use emacsclient to connect with it. Way faster start times.
wiz21c 3y ago
What is "dynamic completion" ?

craftkiller 3y ago

Emacs has code peek. With lsp-mode it has that little window: https://emacs-lsp.github.io/lsp-ui/#lsp-ui-peek https://emacs-lsp.github.io/lsp-ui/#lsp-ui-peek Personally I use eglot with consult which temporarily switches the entire buffer to do the "peek" functionality rather than popping up a tiny window: https://github.com/minad/consult https://github.com/minad/consult

goku12 3y ago

I wonder why everyone's having such long startup time for emacs - like 6 to 8 seconds. Mine has a lot of add-on packages and it still manages to start up in 2 seconds (It's a server. So that happens only once in a session). I haven't done much optimization either - unless you count a lot of autoloads that you automatically get with use-package.