Earlier quoted context omitted.
And that is OK for Notes or todo app, but text editor that is used by developers who tend to customize it with plugins and whatnot I think that is not viable option. But that's just my personal preference, maybe I am wrong...
My two cents: you get what you pay for in your IDE.
VS Code uses 13% CPU when idle due to blinking cursor rendering
51–60 of 801 posts
Re: VS Code uses 13% CPU when idle due to blinking cursor rendering
#52I'm reminded of this classic: https://github.com/npm/npm/issues/11283 NPM had a progress bar that was so fancy that it slowed down installation time (basically its only job) by ~50%. Hilarious. My mantra here is, if you find yourself thinking about implementing a fancy loading spinner/progress bar, it would be more productive to just spend that time making it unnecessary - speed up your shit! Obviously that doesn't a…
Re: VS Code uses 13% CPU when idle due to blinking cursor rendering
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the other hand, iPhone's "Clock" app has an icon that shows the correct time with a super smooth seconds indicator. Which doesn't drain the battery.
How fast does it run on 1995 hardware though?
Re: VS Code uses 13% CPU when idle due to blinking cursor rendering
#54I simply cannot understand why Atom and VSCode are so popular. I get that they are extensible, but is that really worth the slowdown to you? If I need more features than a text editor, I use an actual IDE. Someone just posted some really embarassing benchmark numbers regarding this issue yesterday: https://github.com/jhallen/joes-sandbox/tree/master/editor-p... Note that Atom and VSCode are nearly 10x slower than all…
The benchmarks make it look bad but to be honest aren't that relevant for day-to-day use. I can't remember the last time I saw performance issues in Atom and the plugin infrastructure massively outweighs the occasional possible issue
Re: VS Code uses 13% CPU when idle due to blinking cursor rendering
#55I'm reminded of this classic: https://github.com/npm/npm/issues/11283 NPM had a progress bar that was so fancy that it slowed down installation time (basically its only job) by ~50%. Hilarious. My mantra here is, if you find yourself thinking about implementing a fancy loading spinner/progress bar, it would be more productive to just spend that time making it unnecessary - speed up your shit! Obviously that doesn't a…
I think I don't understand the issue well enough. This looks like a standard blinking cursor to me. Users expect a blinking cursor in an editable text field. I'm not sure why this implementation is slow or why they needed to implement it themselves and not let the OS handle the blinking cursor. I'm guessing there must be some reason.
I'm guessing the culprit for that is in this part of the bug report:
> Zooming into a single frame, we see that while we render only 2 fps, the main thread is performing some work at 60 fps (every 16 ms)
As for
> why they needed to implement it themselves and not let the OS handle the blinking cursor
They're not editing inside a text editor field anymore, they need to blink on html. I guess they're not using a deprecated tag is because it's not customizable in any way.
Re: VS Code uses 13% CPU when idle due to blinking cursor rendering
#56Not to take away but the author's point, just an aside that utilization numbers can be a lot more complicated when there are dozens of energy states and the utilization might be utilization at a particular state rather than utilization at maximum power
Re: VS Code uses 13% CPU when idle due to blinking cursor rendering
#57I'm reminded of this classic: https://github.com/npm/npm/issues/11283 NPM had a progress bar that was so fancy that it slowed down installation time (basically its only job) by ~50%. Hilarious. My mantra here is, if you find yourself thinking about implementing a fancy loading spinner/progress bar, it would be more productive to just spend that time making it unnecessary - speed up your shit! Obviously that doesn't a…
I think I don't understand the issue well enough. This looks like a standard blinking cursor to me. Users expect a blinking cursor in an editable text field. I'm not sure why this implementation is slow or why they needed to implement it themselves and not let the OS handle the blinking cursor. I'm guessing there must be some reason.
Probably because they are using electron.
Re: VS Code uses 13% CPU when idle due to blinking cursor rendering
#58It just doesn't go in my head that we are building text editors inside a web browser! I get it, there are many good use cases for Electron and it's easy to get started with cross platform support, but why is everybody going crazy about text editors in them? Because you can write plugins in JS? Wouldn't it be better to make native application, especially for code editors, where developers spend most of their time, whe…
Yep. I also can't wrap my head around the fact that we are now constructing buttons, drop-down boxes, tagged text boxes using dozens of nested layers instead of a native widget that writes directly to the screen. My 486 rendered UIs with nearly imperceptible lag. Google Docs takes a good 2-3 seconds to spin up a UI on my i7.
Re: VS Code uses 13% CPU when idle due to blinking cursor rendering
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
> easy to get started Yes. > cross platform support Yes. > Because you can write plugins in JS? Yes. --- As much as I prefer native programs as a user, it's impossible to ignore the benefits of cross-platform development and plebeian hackability/debuggability.
And that is OK for Notes or todo app, but text editor that is used by developers who tend to customize it with plugins and whatnot I think that is not viable option. But that's just my personal preference, maybe I am wrong...
Re: VS Code uses 13% CPU when idle due to blinking cursor rendering
#60It just doesn't go in my head that we are building text editors inside a web browser! I get it, there are many good use cases for Electron and it's easy to get started with cross platform support, but why is everybody going crazy about text editors in them? Because you can write plugins in JS? Wouldn't it be better to make native application, especially for code editors, where developers spend most of their time, whe…