You know that your editor is too fucking big when it has to be started in the background as a daemon and have a client version of the editor connect to it, just so it doesn't take 3 seconds to uncomment a line in a 50 byte text file. Emacs is like the adobe acrobat of editors.
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-02 4:33
>>122
You know you're doing it wrong when you close your editor.
>>122
Starting Microsoft Word (after all shared Office processes had been unloaded and the memory flushed) takes thrice more. Visual Studio and Eclipse take even more.
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-02 7:14
>>123
You know you're doing it wrong when you need to boot another operating system just to edit text files.
>>124
On my machine, Microsoft Word 2007 takes about 16 megabytes of physical memory (44 of virtual). Its startup time is just under one second. I have loaded some third party addons, which no doubt contribute to that negatively. Also, this version is noticeably more bloated than the old ones. In particular, 2002 (included with Office XP) was an incredible speed demon, with typical startup times of under a half second in the machine I had back then.
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-02 14:56
>>125
Real programmers use self-hosted Emacs as their only operating system.
anything that longer than 0.1 seconds to start is too slow.
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-02 20:10
>>132
I don't believe you. Are you sure it wasn't already running? A cold start takes one second on my Mac Pro. If you're like me, which is likely as we share a taste for this paragon of American engineering, you probably have about 12GB of RAM, and launch every application you might use at login. This is after all what the dock is all about - making it irrelevant whether an app is already running or not (at least for those of us who buy the best hardware to allow this paradigm to work as intended)
>>135
Am I supposed to fall for this? Trolls these days...
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-02 20:59
>>134 you probably have about 12GB of RAM, and launch every application you might use at login
That's exactly right.
But no, it wasn't already running. It was not really a ``cold start'', however, as I had just quit the running instance to perform the test, so most of its data was already cached. My test procedure was of course ``time open -a TextMate'', which measures the time from the initial launch request until TextMate calls [NSApp finishLaunching], the same action that stops the dock bounce.
This is all academic though, because in any sane universe one would already have TextMate running, at which point opening a file using the command-line client takes less than 0.1 seconds.
>>137
edit: It actually takes several tenths of a second after opening a file before the window is fully displayed. I can't measure that one. Forgive me.
This is all academic though, because in any sane universe one would already have TextMate running, at which point opening a file using the command-line client takes less than 0.1 seconds.
how do you run textmate on a headless server?
edit: It actually takes several tenths of a second after opening a file before the window is fully displayed. I can't measure that one. Forgive me.
and it's too slow to be useful.
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-02 21:31
>>136
I think you're getting delusional if you're finding trolls everywhere.
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-02 21:32
>>137
0.14 real 0.03 user 0.02 sys
on my $5000 Mac Pro with a $230 Velociraptor. Time to upgrade your main HD.
how do you run textmate on a headless server?
Use GNU's Not UNIX Nano for trivial config file edits, if that's the only sort of things you do on it, or set up MacFUSE and sshfs.
Use GNU's Not UNIX Nano for trivial config file edits, if that's the only sort of things you do on it,
why install a non-free toy editor when there's a real free editor already installed?
or set up MacFUSE and sshfs.
and transfer the whole file over the network when i open it and again when i save it? yeah, that's really going to take less than a tenth of second.
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-02 22:03
and transfer the whole file over the network when i open it and again when i save it? yeah, that's really going to take less than a tenth of second.
Yes, it probably will, unless you're connection is shit.
>>143
the server is halfway around the world.
it's not my connection that's shit, it's your shitty third-world country's connection that's shit.
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-02 22:14
>>144
Then a responsive editor will be better than a fast open/save time
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-02 23:00
>>141
My (fairly recent) experience with MacFUSE is that it crashes the fucking kernel whenever a filesystem driver doesn't respond properly. Which is beyond pathetic since half the reason for FUSE to exist is so we can avoid that kind of thing.
>>152
Yes. Additionally, I think that you're one of these annoying faggots who hate GNU license because once it's there, it's always there, and not for any actual reason.
I think that you're one of these annoying faggots who hate GNU license because once it's there, it's always there, and not for any actual reason.
You're wrong. I hate GNU licenses because half the license text is that idiotic preamble that contradicts the actual license terms, and because they claim that their proprietary license is a free software license and that real free software licenses aren't free.
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-03 0:21
The GPL is a trojan horse. Once you use it, RMS Mark Shuttleworth is free to change it, and leverage your project to wage his pathetic wars on whatever he feels like hating right now, like the American Republican party, or Javascript.
Name:
Anonymous2009-06-03 0:51
>>156
Smart people will remove the "or later" when they decide that a license like GPLv2 will be beneficial to their open source project, just like Lihnuss Thorwaltz did.