3 ms·
point 2 about atom: Well, writing a text editor is far more complicated than it seems at first place.In order to support big files (50mb logs for instance), yo
by aikah 11y ago
point 2 about atom:
Well, writing a text editor is far more complicated than it seems at first place.In order to support big files (50mb logs for instance), you need to make all your code rely on complex memory management, streaming and caching. Maybe js is not the right tool for the job in order to implement these features. I always thought that atom should be build in Qt with an api that can interact with JS,a bit like Adobe products for instance. That way you still allow JS plugins, just like Photoshop while getting a max of perfs thanks to C++.
- outworlder 11y agoThe problem with Atom is not due to javascript. Editing large files is a non-trivial problem. Editors such as Emacs (which has some C code, but a LOT of elisp) go to great lengths to make editing large files possible. The algorithms and data structures used are very clever. Atom does have C++ code, since is essentially Chromium. However, try a naive implementation in Assembly and you'll find that the Emacs Lisp buffer manipulation code will outperform it. In fact, if you try to use C strings (null-terminated), you're doomed from the beginning.
- runj__ 11y agoAtom is a super weird example, wouldn't it bloat the software to add support for files larger than 2MB? Wouldn't that be feature bloat? I mean, a code editor shouldn't have to deal with gigantic files since code shouldn't be written that way <sup>[citation needed]</sup>.