[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Is Elisp really that slow?

From: Óscar Fuentes
Subject: Re: Is Elisp really that slow?
Date: Thu, 16 May 2019 22:50:45 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux)

Can't resist on commenting two points:

Ergus <address@hidden> writes:

> 3) The development is not focused in the first thing that a user needs
> when she opens emacs: provide the most comfortable and useful TEXT

For many people this is Notepad.

> If emacs as TEXT EDITOR does not convince them (just the first try,
> without config, without reading the manual/tutorial/documentation), then
> they will not even try any other functionality.

Indeed, Emacs has a non-negligible learning curve. Other editors do a
lot out of the box in a familiar way, but then you hit the wall. Emacs
is lacking in out-of-the-box functionality for modern programming
languages but otherwise, as a pure editor, it has no walls.

> I think that you are one
> of the few in this list who sees the importance if attracting new
> users/developers. Unlike vim; emacs is not in the gnu/linux distros, it
> is slower and bigger...

Are you sure? emacs -Q is instant here, vim grew quite a bit and,
anyway, who cares about a few dozen MB of difference when some of the
modern contenders use GB of *RAM* to work?

> so we need to offer some advantage on the first
> try over the others to keep the users.

Emacs provides some advantages, but they are not apparent until you
experience them. That's a problem for people grown on a culture of
instant gratification. Emacs appeals to certain type of users who
understand that gains require efforts. The really big problem is that
Emacs no longer compete on areas were it used to bring the largest
gains. Other editors largely surpassed Emacs' gains while requiring less

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]