5 ms·
For the absolute lightweight, there is vi, eMacs, nano, etc. For a UI I’ve been using VSCode. It is quite quick when you disable all extensions and most settin
by SamuelAdams 7mo ago
For the absolute lightweight, there is vi, eMacs, nano, etc.
For a UI I’ve been using VSCode. It is quite quick when you disable all extensions and most settings.
- tmtvl 7mo ago> absolute lightweight > eMacs I love Emacs, but I don't see how a Lisp platform with a web browser, a Tetris implementation, and 4 terminal emulators (shell, term, ansi-term, eshell) can be considered 'lightweight'.
- SamuelAdams 7mo agoHa, fair. Lightweight in this context is relative to Notepad or any modern Windows application.
- kibibu 7mo agoNotepad.exe used to be <200kB. Emacs is tens of megabytes
- CSm1n 7mo agoNotepad was just a wrapper around some default win32 controls. Judging alone by exe size is not right, although probably a “statically linked” notepad would still be smaller than emacs
- eviks 7mo agoIt is right by definition. Link emacs to those controls, shed some statically linked weight, and it will also become lighter!
- 1bpp 7mo agoTo be fair you can say that of anything with a scripting engine, you could have all that in vim or stripped down emacs
- wk_end 7mo agoAnything with a scripting engine isn't lightweight compared to (classic) Notepad! (Also, a lot of that stuff comes bundled with Emacs out-of-the-box, further disqualifying it. Having a scripting engine is one thing, but having a scripting engine along with the whole rest of the jet is something else entirely!)
- deathanatos 7mo agoAs the old saying goes, "emacs is an operating system lacking only a decent text editor".
- noosphr 7mo agoNot so. Evil mode is a great text editor.
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- JohnFen 7mo agovi and emacs are absolutely not lightweight, let alone "absolutely lightweight".
- jmclnx 7mo agoIf by vi you mean vim, then I agree, real vi is rather lite. As someone famous said, "everything is relative" :) Compared to the new applications that have been coming out, Emacs and vim are a paragon of lightness.
- irishcoffee 7mo agoI agree with you that vi is lighter than vim. I’ve seen more than a few instances of an OS just aliasing vi to vim. On that note, why are the keybindings for vi on a “modern” Ubuntu different from fedoras? I remember having to mess with ^H in a vimrc or something to that effect to mimic the behavior I was expecting.
- cwillu 7mo agoSounds like the terminal (not vi) you're using has different defaults; backspace and delete are the two common keys that vary.
- irishcoffee 7mo agoThat makes a lot of sense. I'll do some research on different terminal behaviors. Thanks!
- JohnFen 7mo agoVim is heavier, but vi is not at all "lite".
- jmclnx 7mo agoI do not know what you are saying. On NetBSD I see this with vi and vim editing the same file VSZ RSS MAXRSS COMMAND 13240 2896 2896 /usr/bin/vi x.txt 45412 15212 15212 /usr/pkg/bin/vim x.txt
- paxys 7mo agoI'm sorry but you cannot use VS Code and lightweight in the same sentence.
- projektfu 7mo agoMaybe joe, jed, or uEmacs.