31–40 of 240 posts
Also, I noticed that it requires WebGL so without modern and supported by WebKit graphic card it won't work. Why is OpenGL necessary for a text editor? I don't understand.
Why not? Modern desktops are all hardware-accelerated anyway.
How disappointing that text editors require such... abstraction. Overengineering at its finest?
Also, I noticed that it requires WebGL so without modern and supported by WebKit graphic card it won't work. Why is OpenGL necessary for a text editor? I don't understand.
try drawing a 5k monitor full of true type fonts in software sometime.
Also, I noticed that it requires WebGL so without modern and supported by WebKit graphic card it won't work. Why is OpenGL necessary for a text editor? I don't understand.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Every text editor beyond the most basic is incredibly complex. Terminals are a complete mess, so every terminal-based text editor certainly can't be called "simple", and that's not even beginning to consider extensibility! Emacs and Vim have entire interpreters embedded into their codebases, for instance. Maybe text editors with an extensible feature set really are more complex than we've been led to believe?
A longer version of my first comment originally admitted that Notepad's tech stack probably looks a lot like Xray's.... But then I would bet the Notepad engineers didn't wag their dicks on a blog post telling the world how special they are because they figured out how to make the Win32 message pump performant.... I'm happy they're finally treating Electron performance seriously... oh wait, they aren't! Just writing t…
Also, I noticed that it requires WebGL so without modern and supported by WebKit graphic card it won't work. Why is OpenGL necessary for a text editor? I don't understand.
consider how many pixels a 5k monitor has. try drawing a 5k monitor full of true type fonts in software sometime.
I've always felt like the inevitable conclusion of Atom and other electron based apps is the reversion to using low level compiled languages. I'm starting to get tired of how much of a resource hog Atom is.
If it weren't for the oddness of the language, Lua would be a perfect fit. Near-C speeds, super flexible, no recompiles. You'd lose type safety compared to Rust, but they don't have that with JS now anyway. I don't think the majority of the memory consumption is from JS though, moreso the embedded browser+DOM approach. Edit: Blaming electron for bloat more than JS.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Servo is actually modular, and most of it is available as Rust libraries including the layout and rendering engines. There is not a full electron like solution available yet though.
And how easy is to actually to incorporate in other projects?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you edit files once in a blue moon, `notepad.exe` is more than sufficient. If you work with hundreds of files per day as part of your profession, you are going to want something a bit better. I wouldn't call it over engineering if it solves a real problem.
That hasn't been solved before, a thousand times over, by people who frequently like to coalesce into cliques that represent their choice...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Every text editor beyond the most basic is incredibly complex. Terminals are a complete mess, so every terminal-based text editor certainly can't be called "simple", and that's not even beginning to consider extensibility! Emacs and Vim have entire interpreters embedded into their codebases, for instance. Maybe text editors with an extensible feature set really are more complex than we've been led to believe?
What's the memory footprint of Terminal.app and vim + plug-ins?
It's extraordinary how wasteful some apps can be.