Screw you guys for telling me this was a meme. It runs flawlessly,

>>57235095
So how is it better than Sublime?

>>57235095
>my computer can run it just fine

YOUR computer can run it just fine. Not everybody can afford a computer who will run this efficiently.
>looks better
Agreed here.
>allows you to navigate by clicking
Sounds like it is aimed at newbie programmers instead of experienced ones. Taking your hand off your keyboard wastes crucial time and energy.
>programming in a starbucks
what the fuck are you even doing?

>>57235095

the startup takes for fucking ever

>>57235134
It's FOSS for a start

>>57235202
>YOUR computer can run it just fine. Not everybody can afford a computer who will run this efficiently.
If you own a computer in 2016 that struggles to run a text editor then you've got bigger problems.

>>57235294
So?

File: 1411515525663.jpg (165KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 1024x768px

>>57235607
Please leave this board

>>57235095
it fuckign takes 4 seconds to start on an i7 6700.
the entire UI is god awful and certain settings are completely illogical or not even present, reliant on plugins.

yea, it has a built in package manager and it has git integration.
point is, get the same packages on sublime, and have a better life.
or just use nvim.

>>57235643
>it fuckign takes 4 seconds to start on an i7 6700.
Wow, 4 whole seconds. Is it really that big of a deal? Other software takes way longer to start.

>>57235095
>check how bloated it is for amusement
>the download is 63mb
>for a text editor
>doesn't even have the excuse of microsoft format bullshit like office suite software does
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA jesus fucking christ and people willingly run that shit?

>>57235697
It's a fucking text editor. Opening it on an i7, any i7, should be nigh instant. If not then something is horribly horribly wrong. And there are many horribly wrong things with Atom.

>>57235134
>>57235643
So what's the word about Lime Text? Any good? (I don't really care, since I use SciTE, but more options is always nice.)

>>57235319
You'd be surprised how slow this text editor is.

>>57235319
By "a text editor" you mean a web browser running a Javascript engine with a library that runs a library that emulates a text editing component that interfaces with a layer of libraries that emulate a regular window into which a webpage is rendered that loads several dozen Javascript plugins that interface with it in order to edit text.

File: atom.gif (1MB, 1329x690px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1329x690px

>>57235643
>sublime text

No markdown live preview.

>>57235607
you do know that for 80% of people here FOSS is the only selling point they need.

>>57235095
Try to open a 2 GB file in it.

>>57235095
By the time it opens you will have forgot why you opened it.

>>57237734
vim has that

>>57237779
80% of people here are retards.

>>57237856
95%*

>>57237804
Show me.

>>57237226
But anon, VIM is 30mb and it doesn't even have a proper GUI

>>57235095
>who cares if it's more "bloated" than other text editors

People like you are the reason computers still run like arse when stuff like Amiga Workbench booted in 3 seconds with shitloads of extra bloat when you ran it on good hardware.

>>57237226
people is willing to use a fucking terminal made in javascript.

>>57235319
>you've got bigger problems.

Yes, Atom is that problem.

>works flawlessly
>still OOM panics my laptop on 40kloc file

Well, sure it works flawlessly for certain demographic. Reminds me of how windows 10 "works flawlessly" shills.

>>57237974
Is this true? What the fuck. Literal fucking bloatware.

>>57237974
That 63mb is the compressed download size. My distro tells me the size required on disk for Atom is more like 320mb.

>>57237869
100%*

>>57238147
vim is xbox hueg (esp with python+lua bindings). it's not as much about binary size, but how well it can cope with large files and big modifications.

HTML browser is about as good text editor as it is video player. It works, sorta, but is not really that great.

>>57238147
Nearly everything is bloated to hell and back these days. It's really annoying. Fucking GHC is over 1gb. Somehow.

>>57238187
What version are you using? I'm pretty sure vanilla vim is less than 10 megabytes.

>>57238147
It is 2.2MB here and I could build it smaller.

>>57238210
GHC is one of the most advanced compilers ever, of course it's huge.

>>57238147
>>57237974
Only with dependencies

Installed-Size: 2,423 kB
Download-Size: 1,031 kB

>>57238214
Depends on compile options and whether you count dependencies or not.

Can range be 2-4M RSS for vim on alpine+musl, lua and vimscript only.

or 80MB RSS on my ubuntu box with shitton of plugins installed (yes, including two python ones).

That said, I dont really care until the memory and cpu usage gets ridiculous (atom using several gigs of ram is the norm).

>>57238274
>>57238210
And GHC is 463M (37.5MB download)

>>57235095
That you would even compare atom with vim alone tells me that you're a retard

>>57238274
> GHC is one of the most advanced compilers ever, of course it's huge.
Nah - *that* one is just sad.

There is nothing reasonable about a compiler (and maybe some standard libs) being 1GB in size.

>>57238274
I refuse to believe it's so "advanced" as to justify that ridiculous size.

>>57238187
I should have known /g/ was lying when they said this bloated piece of junk was good.

File: hyperapp2.webm (513KB, 894x630px) Image search: [Google]

513KB, 894x630px

>>57237226
forgot to upload this.

>>57238274
>GHC is one of the most advanced compilers ever

It's not even close. It's one of the most advanced compilers for the low hanging fruit of optimizing lazy functional languages but there are far more advanced compilers for a lot of languages. Intel's C++ compiler does optimizations GHC couldn't even dream of.

>>57235643
>it fuckign takes 4 seconds to start on an i7 6700.
'cause that's mostly related to CPU and not storage speed, right?

>>57238479
> this is what 5 GB of RAM usage gets you

>>57238521
>cause that's mostly related to CPU and not storage speed

Actually yes. Most of Atom's startup time is parsing Javascript and loading DOM elements which is CPU bound in this particular case.

>>57238521
Do you think that people who spend their time complaining about text editors on the internet are REALLY trying to analyze performance?

>>57238479
KILL IT WITH NUCLEAR RAGEFIRE

>>57238490
>Intel's C++ compiler does optimizations GHC couldn't even dream of
Like rigging benchmark code? :^)

>>57238339
It can be much bigger than that if you count the necessary addys to make vim more or less ok code editor (some extensions like clang-ctags? well, count whole clang in, then).

There are meme "suckless" eidition of vim, like vis. Those tend to be buggy and useless now, but may show some promise in the future, especially if lua plugins from vim can be bridged in (and that some key plugins get ported to lua in the first place).

vimscript seriously needs to die.

>>57238604
I couldn't agree more, who in their right mind thinks a fuckin terminal could be that bloated piece of shit? My guess is someone who doesn't use a terminal ever or wants to look like a hacker while typing LS and eating a salad before getting his ass blasted by huge black cocks

>>57235095
Are you a webdev?

>>57238606
>It can be much bigger than that

Sure, but Atom will be much bigger as well if you want decent language integration for anything other than Javascript. The base install, which is almost 400MB, has far fewer features than vim.

>>57235134
Has every packages that sublime offers plus more + FOSS + Cross platform compilable + god tier debuggers

Sublime kek is finished

>>57238606
>It can be much bigger than that if you count the necessary addys to make vim more or less ok code editor (some extensions like clang-ctags? well, count whole clang in, then).
Why do you count a compiler for a text editor's size?

I don't even do that for IDE - IntelliJ may require and use Java's VM, but it's not only used for that (sbt / mvn on the command line and various other programs use it too) - so it isn't PART OF Intellij.

Shit, if you count compilers for the text editor's size, you might as well count the kernel & shell and everything required to use these, too.

>>57238683
List some examples, irrelevant in terms of functionality, so is Sublime and what?

>>57238726
Rephrase

>>57235697
I'm a very impatient person

Visual Studio Code is literally better

>>57238274
Other places on the internet tell me that GHC is so big-mclarge-huge because of static linking and debug info. In a sane world it would be no more than 200mb or so, if that.

>>57238814
Nice ripoff, pajeet

>>57238814
Note the "literally" in there, it's an important part of sentence that convinces us of this person's view without any explanation or proof.

>>57238683
i really tried to like st, even paid for the copy, but eventually ditched it.

st is shiny. it pioneered some nice intuitive editing features (esp things like multicaret) out of the box, but lacks many of those unintuitive but powerful ones (record macro templates? sensible ctags? dream on.).

st ex mode is non existent (and the emulation plugins barely scratch the surface and tend to be quite buggy).

atom is the same deal, but add 100x more resource usage and flaky UI.

for all intents and purposes i'd love to ditch vim because the runtime kinda sucks. IF there was something with vim style command mode which actually works, plus the library of extensions for it to customise the ux.

still not sure if nvim is it. it's just a fork with all the rejected patches slapped in, making it even more bloaty than stock vim. then again, some features there are quite nice (eg asynchronicty in scripts).

then there is vis trying to go suckless route.

incremental unsuckage of vim codebase, or starting from scratch? who knows. neither offers that much yet to make it worth the trouble with switching.

>>57238829
It's leagues faster and allows you to write plugins with the better version of JavaScript. Seems like an improvement in my book desu.

>caring how your TEXT editor looks

>>57238852
I didn't pay for sublime text but man, atom is so more powerful than st ever was. You you lack resource you can compile it with flags as you like

>>57238860
>It's leagues faster
Both uses the same technology
>>57238860
>allows you to write plugins with the better version of JavaScript
Autism
0/2

>>57238701
indeed the distinction is murky. tab completion and syntax aware navigation is clearly editors job, right?

but to get that in vim, you basically need to call the compiler frontend via clang ctags - even if you don't actually compile the code, just editing it.

>>57238910
They both use Electron, but that's it. Yes, VSCode DOES run faster than Atom. You're welcome to try it out or look it up yourself.

>>57238910
>atom is so more powerful than st ever was.

Depends which features you want. If you care about plugin manager, it makes no difference for me.

I tried to fight with atom-vim-mode-plus for a while, and eventually gave up. Way too many missing blanks to get anywhere near vim. It felt on the same par as st3 vintage.

>>57237779
It's a minimum requirement. Like when buying a laptop you expect it to have a keyboard, when choosing a piece of software we expect it to be free software by default.

>>57239086
Basically this. You'd have to work really hard to make me use a proprietary piece of software if it's not ABSOLUTELY necessary.

>>57239122
Meh. Depends what the privacy/security/freedom implications are. I buy games from Humble Bundle on occasion. Are they proprietary? Yes. Do I care? Nope.

>>57238910
>atom is so more powerful than st ever was.
I keep hearing this, seriously, how is it more "powerful" other than the fact that the UI is a webpage?

>>57239086
>>57239122
If software in question permits reasonable amount of customization (and dev is good and quick at fixing bugs in core runtime) that I'd never feel the need to touch the core, what's the practical difference?

I mean when one ignores ideological stances for now. If you want examples, uTorrent or DraStic for me. All free alternatives for that given platform suck horribly compared to proprietary ones.

>>57238606
>vimscript seriously needs to die.
Honestly Atom/SublimeText are better editors just because you can use an actual scripting language to write plugins. As shitty as people say JS is, it is by far a better language for writing plugins with than Vimscript.

>>57239178
It's more powerful when it comes to styling its ui with css sheets. The most important feature of any text editor.

>>57235095
>navigate by clicking rather than pressing 50 different keys
If you're pressing 50 keys in vim you're doing it wrong

>>57239192
Agreed. This is why vim python and lua now, but the amount of plugins there is still meager, but some important ones (like neocomplete) are implemented in lua already.

neovim wants to take it a step further, transpile legacy vimscript to lua and get rid of vimscript in core for good.

you may not like lua as general language, but for embedded scripting its a godsend.

>>57239191
But... uTorrent is riddled with ads and not even all that secure. I usually recommend Transmission-Qt to my Windows-using colleagues and they've all been pleased with it thus far. Check it out if you want, it's basically the same as Transmission's Unix versions but that tends to be enough.

>>57238943
No, you don't? There are tab completion & correction & highlighting mechanisms that work with syntax files.

IntelliSense is mainly compiler's functionality.

In cases where the compiler doesn't do it but someone re-implemented everything required for IntelliSense with that compiler into a software development tool, you are looking at a full IDE rather than an editor. You can count that purpose-made IntelliSense implementation as belonging to the IDE, because it serves only the IDE.

File: 1477393537301.jpg (141KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 1024x768px

>>57235134
>using proprietary software

>>57239191
>what is qBittorrent