On Sun, Jul 16, 2023 at 07:58:07PM +0200, Tony Mechelynck wrote: > And you think 2.7 seconds is unbearably long? I suppose I'm > old-fashioned. When I started programming on a mainframe in the > seventies (131072 six-bit characters, no virtual memory, no > floating-point computations, no lowercase printing, 667 kHz, and it > needed an air-conditioned hall bigger than the apartment I live in > today) it took way longer than that to load a test program from its > executable tape. Even after downloading the tested version to disk, > three seconds would have been lightning-quick. Oh well, times change > after all. I am glad I wasn't born in the seventies then. Though the music was awesome. ;)
> Try getting (or compiling) a minimal version of Vim without GUI > (possibly called "vi") then load it as "vi -u NONE -N". Maybe you will > regret its lack of features, and in particular its lack of GUI and its > lack of configuration possibilities, but I expect it will load > significantly faster. After you test it for some time, then maybe you > will decide that 2.7 seconds wasn't so bad after all for the features > you enjoyed. Or maybe you will be so enthusiastic about having a > zip-fast (if feature-poor) Vim that you'll stay with it. Well that's a way to go, but I really don't want to maintain my own separate repo, as I don't even contribute to the upstream project in any way. I am enjoying relying on my package manager to keep me updated. -- Manas -- -- You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist. Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vim_use" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to vim_use+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/d76vt5vzz67mcaaa74z4iwppifjw4cjght26xi4zvr7xiax5n3%4045xzcnuubcp3.
