jhallen / joes-sandbox Goto Github PK

Version 1.15 came out:

Large file support - Improved performance for large files, no size limit on 64-bit machines.

A retest would be cool.

Would you like to make this comparison a routine like update every several months? So that it can reflect the improvement in those editors. Some of them evolves quite fast.

well, the title really says all that's required

Following the results in this test, which highlighted some very old bottlenecks, we worked on major performance improvements and we would be very grateful if could re-run the tests with this new version (in particular, it has full on-disk editing support).

Thanks!

• Note which editors are spawning multiple processes
• Note whether or not the UI thread is blocked while an action is being performed

Very interesting results, would you mind to add neovim to your work? Thanks very much!

It's probably time to rerun these stats with the latest version of Atom....

...
Well...
That would really be handy.
And please add nvim (see #4).

Thanks for the work.

according to https://www.heise.de/forum/heise-Developer/News-Kommentare/Texteditor-Nano-Schnell-schneller-Release-3-0/Text-Editor-Performance-Comparison/thread-5731270/ nano 3.0 is now "70% faster compared to 2.2.6" . It would be fantastic to have nano3 in the comparsion table

Hi,
Really cool benchmarks. Interesting to read. I would like to propose one improvement and two editors to be included in the benchmark.

I think it would be great to see the exact way you used to fulfill the given task. Maybe there are more efficient ways for some editors, that you didn't think of.

Also I think it would be nice to see benchmarks for Remacs and Neovim in comparison to Emacs and Vim.

This is a longstanding code editor of immense capability that covers all the points in this analysis. It should be included.

Hey,

These metrics are cool, but can you add a measurement for the Kilo text editor?

It's made by the author of Redis and supports syntax highlighting and other features at just under 1000 lines of code.

https://github.com/antirez/kilo

In the Regular Expression Search and Replace, there's no entry for ed. The test would be

,s/100\|200/EXACT/g

Another cool & fast editor made with Lua

Long ago, on a P4 with 512 MB memory I edit a TB+ wikipedia xml dump in texpad and my head is still spinning with the question how the #$%#$ they did that. In 0 seconds it just gives you the text and a cursor, it scrolls to whereever you want to go in the file as if it was just a tiny document. Editing just works... some how. Text replace also works. Macros are fast enough to get seemingly absurd jobs done in minutes. Then you hit save and its just done rightaway.

I just paste a 900 kb json into Atom, edited it (a key stroke took 4 seconds) then tried to save it... nothing happened.

You are definitely onto something with this benchmark. Thank you for making it.

It's a really old editor written by Rob Pike, with some really nifty regex features, and it'd be interesting to see how it stacks up.

On some distros there's a plan9port package which includes Sam.

The key point is to turn off inefficient linum-mode when file is too big.

Set up Emacs to turn off syntax highlight and linum-mode by adding below code into ~/.emacs:

(defun buffer-too-big-p ()
  (or (> (buffer-size) (* 5000 64))
      (> (line-number-at-pos (point-max)) 5000)))
(defun generic-setup ()
  ;; turn off `linum-mode' when there are more than 5000 lines
  (if (buffer-too-big-p) (linum-mode -1)))
(add-hook 'prog-mode-hook 'generic-setup)
(add-hook 'text-mode-hook 'generic-setup)

My complete Emacs setup is at https://github.com/redguardtoo/emacs.d

Linux cli to create huge 3g.txt:
base64 /dev/urandom | head -c 3000000000 > 3g.txt

Then run emacs -nw 3g.txt, here is the screenshot. I can edit this file without any problem.

http://www.jasspa.com/ This version runs on multiple platforms and extremely fast. It would be interesting to see how it performs when compared to other editors listed here.

Would you be able to add Vis benchmarks on the same hardware please?

In the "Simple Search and Replace" benchmark, Emacs seems to have better performance for this test in more recent versions. Also, to test this, I used the replace-string function rather than query-replace. On my system, emacs -Q -nw yields much better performance for this test. This is specifically what I ran:

M-x benchmark RET
Form: (replace-string "thing" "thang" nil (if (use-region-p) (region-beginning)) (if (use-region-p) (region-end)) nil)

This is the result:

Elapsed time: 3.062449s (1.079758s in 28 GCs)

According to these results, Emacs ran this test about 3x faster than the current benchmark.

Here is my version info:

GNU Emacs 25.3.3 (x86_64-apple-darwin17.0.0, NS appkit-1561.00 Version 10.13 (Build 17A405))

Nice repo! It would be interesting to see how ne fares.

What does "reformat" mean in context of:

"reformat paragraph composed of two 120K long lines" ?

Xi editor is a young effort at creating a very fast text editor. It is not as mature as any of the other editors listed but probably deserves to be tested on the benchmark. Would be interesting to see how it performs against the rest of them.

https://github.com/google/xi-editor

Please use it, only note- to enable loading of huge files, one needs to set option in user.json, named like ....max_size....

I'm curious where geany stands against sublime and notepad++

In NVI (or in any other vi clone) the way to reformat a paragraph is to pipe it to fmt.

Place the cursor at the beginning of the paragraph ant type: !}fmt

Can you also add bluefish editor please - not that the difference is that big for other GTK based editors I think. But still, for sake of completeness:

http://bluefish.openoffice.nl/index.html
http://bluefish.openoffice.nl/download.html

CudaText is an open source text editor designed in the ideals of Sublime Text but in FreePascal / Lazarus.

Project GitHub Repository:
https://github.com/Alexey-T/CudaText

There are precompiled binaries available. Let me know if I can do anything to help add this editor to the sandbox. I would love to see how it performs in comparison with other editors.