Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Atom 1.9 and 1.10 beta

blog.atom.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 93 posts

Re: Atom 1.9 and 1.10 beta

#51

Post by duaneb »

mikeokner wrote: post #30
jackhack wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It should not take an i7 processor to run a text editor. I mean no disrespect, but either something is very wrong with your computer, or something is very wrong with this software.

It's the original Electron[1] app. It's just a JavaScript web application running in a re-branded Chrome window, which is why it uses an absurd amount of computing power compared to a normal text editor (or most other native applications). [1] http://electron.atom.io/

Do they at least render natively, or do they rely on Blink + (I'm assuming) some crazy JS text rendering & syntax coloring to get it usable?

Re: Atom 1.9 and 1.10 beta

#53

Post by 2trill2spill »

cageface wrote: post #48
hartator wrote: post #7

I have participated a bit in the Atom.io open source repository, but now I am back to Sublime. It's so fast and reliable compared to Atom.io.

Atom may not be as fast as some native editors but I've found it to more than fast enough for 99% of the code editing I do and the plugin ecosystem and overall user experience is better than any other editor I've tried. I use it mostly for Rails & React coding and have been very happy for the productivity boost. I launch it once or twice a day so waiting 5-10 seconds is a small price to pay.

> Atom may not be as fast as some native editors but I've found it to more than fast enough for 99% of the code editing I do and the plugin ecosystem and overall user experience is better than any other editor I've tried.

How big are the projects you are working on? When I was messing around with atom yesterday on a single small file it was great. But when I opened a project I'm working on, about 15,000 lines of C across 50 or so files, atom becomes unusably slow. 15,000 lines is pretty small compared to lot's of other projects and atom couldn't handle that. It's too bad because I like atom, I thought the plugin system was much easier than Sublime's and I liked the overall look and feel better than Sublime.

Re: Atom 1.9 and 1.10 beta

#54

Post by NeutronBoy »

shocks wrote: post #47
coldtea wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the same reason waiting 1-2 minutes for your laptop to boot is. Also because people often open/close tons of small files during the day instead of opening a project and working on it for hours. Plus, the slugginess extends beyond startup time, into working with large files (were large = puny for other editors' standard) and other activities.

When my laptop is booting I'm usually fetching coffee. Most of the time I just crack the lid, it wakes up, and all my editors are still running anyway. I probably boot an app like Atom once or twice a week. Plenty of tools I use (PHPStorm, vagrant boxes, VMware) all take way longer than 5 seconds to load and that has no noticeable impact on my productivity or happiness. It seems silly to me for someone to adopt a str…

> You don't park your car at red lights and turn off the engine, then complain about how long it takes to pull away when the lights turn green.

You didn't, until car startup time was optimized enough that modern cars do turn off the engine at red lights to save resources, then turn it back on when you put your foot down.

Re: Atom 1.9 and 1.10 beta

#55

Post by cageface »

2trill2spill wrote: post #53
cageface wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Atom may not be as fast as some native editors but I've found it to more than fast enough for 99% of the code editing I do and the plugin ecosystem and overall user experience is better than any other editor I've tried. I use it mostly for Rails & React coding and have been very happy for the productivity boost. I launch it once or twice a day so waiting 5-10 seconds is a small price to pay.

> Atom may not be as fast as some native editors but I've found it to more than fast enough for 99% of the code editing I do and the plugin ecosystem and overall user experience is better than any other editor I've tried. How big are the projects you are working on? When I was messing around with atom yesterday on a single small file it was great. But when I opened a project I'm working on, about 15,000 lines of C ac…

I've been working on projects around 5k-10kloc without any issues. None of the individual files are more than a few hundred lines though. Atom doesn't handle really long files well but I consider those a sign of a need to refactor anyway.

Re: Atom 1.9 and 1.10 beta

#56

Post by Somasis »

They still don't have a way to build a release without a network connection. Which basically means any secure (builds in sandbox) source-based distro can't package it.

Re: Atom 1.9 and 1.10 beta

#57

Post by 2trill2spill »

cageface wrote: post #55
2trill2spill wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Atom may not be as fast as some native editors but I've found it to more than fast enough for 99% of the code editing I do and the plugin ecosystem and overall user experience is better than any other editor I've tried. How big are the projects you are working on? When I was messing around with atom yesterday on a single small file it was great. But when I opened a project I'm working on, about 15,000 lines of C ac…

I've been working on projects around 5k-10kloc without any issues. None of the individual files are more than a few hundred lines though. Atom doesn't handle really long files well but I consider those a sign of a need to refactor anyway.

I didn't realize Atom struggled with long files. But the longest file in my project is about 1200 lines, the rest are a couple hundred lines or so. Your right about the refactoring but there's lot's of other stuff to work on as well so that probably won't be done anytime soon.

Also my computer is due for an upgrade which adds to the unusability, it's a 2010 MBP with a 1TB 840 evo and 16GB ram. The CPU is definitely lacking though, it's a 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo.

Re: Atom 1.9 and 1.10 beta

#58

Post by nkg »

krisdol wrote: post #52

For once, on an atom release thread, can we have a discussion about atom and this release rather than endless threads about folks preferring vscode or sublime?

Seems like no one is giving love! I enjoy Atom and I use it daily (I do website at some webagency).

It is fast, even with Photoshop, Indesign, and multiple Chrome tabs opened.

Pros: its handy and has so many addons. Not crippled with useless toolbars like Eclips-y editors.

Cons: Sadly, it's still missing a "go-to-method-declaration" feature (did I miss something? ), and is awfuly buggy when editing over FTP.

Re: Atom 1.9 and 1.10 beta

#59

Post by mintplant »

duaneb wrote: post #51
mikeokner wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the original Electron[1] app. It's just a JavaScript web application running in a re-branded Chrome window, which is why it uses an absurd amount of computing power compared to a normal text editor (or most other native applications). [1] http://electron.atom.io/

Do they at least render natively, or do they rely on Blink + (I'm assuming) some crazy JS text rendering & syntax coloring to get it usable?

The latter.

Re: Atom 1.9 and 1.10 beta

#60

Post by moosingin3space »

coldtea wrote: post #41
kaeluka wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I went back to (non-native) emacs, partially due to this problem.

Emacs has tons of C code. And the display (and core text manipulation stuff IIRC) is not written in elisp. In contrast, Atom just uses native code as the JIT, and then not only does (almost) everything in JS but also renders it with slow DOM.

I'm looking forward to Guile Emacs, if it ever gets merged into mainline, because emacs will then have a JIT (and maybe we can then land things like real threads)
Post reply on HN