Manas wrote:
> Compilation: gcc -c -I. -Iproto -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -DFEAT_GUI_GTK
> -I/usr/include/gtk-3.0 -I/usr/include/pango-1.0 -I/usr/include/glib-2.0
> -I/usr/lib/glib-2.0/include -I/usr/include/sysprof-4 -I/usr/include/harfbuzz
> -I/usr/include/freetype2 -I/usr/include/libpng16 -I/usr/inclu
How often are you starting vim?
The great thing about current OSes vs those of the 30+ years ago, you can
have multiple terminals and apps open at one time. When working on code, I
keep a vim session up the entire time with the files I'm editing loaded and
just switch terminals to compile and
On Sun, Jul 16, 2023 at 09:05:37PM -, Lifepillar wrote:
> 170ms are also spent loading buffers. Do you need those to be loaded
> eagerly at startup? Also, is context.vim for ConTeXt? ConTeXt support is
> built-in into Vim (`:help ft-context`): do you need a plugin for that?
> If so, why loading
On Sun, Jul 16, 2023 at 01:47:37PM -0700, Gary Johnson wrote:
> On 2023-07-17, Manas wrote:
> > I was using `hyperfine -i /usr/bin/vim`.
> >
> > But I tested with above commands too.
> >
> > ```
> > $ hyperfine "vim -cq"
> > Benchmark 1: vim -cq
> > Time (mean ± σ): 2.414 s ± 0.017 s[
On 2023-07-16, Manas wrote:
> `startuptime` surprisingly shows me a mere 656ms, while hyperfine shows
> me 2.7s. I am not sure how this discrepancy is arising. Here is the full
> log. https://pastebin.mozilla.org/uTrJ7i8N
>
> I see 234ms (out of those 656ms, ~35%) due to VimEnter autocommands.
17
On 2023-07-17, Manas wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 16, 2023 at 01:01:23PM -0700, Gary Johnson wrote:
> > All of those things are possible and probably good ideas, but
> > driving them all to zero would improve the time by only 656 ms and
> > still leaves you with an annoying 2.1 s unaccounted for.
> >
> >
On Sun, Jul 16, 2023 at 10:10:02PM +0200, Dominique Pellé wrote:
> In your startup file, I see:
>
> 374.858 001.193 001.193: sourcing
> /home/neon/.vim/plugged/vim-gutentags/autoload/gutentags.vim
> 377.927 002.447 002.447: sourcing
> /home/neon/.vim/plugged/YouCompleteMe/autoload/youcompleteme.vi
On Sun, Jul 16, 2023 at 01:01:23PM -0700, Gary Johnson wrote:
> All of those things are possible and probably good ideas, but
> driving them all to zero would improve the time by only 656 ms and
> still leaves you with an annoying 2.1 s unaccounted for.
>
> The output of hyperfine shows only the p
Manas wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 16, 2023 at 10:55:04AM -0700, Gary Johnson wrote:
> > It depends, of course, on why it is slow. You can start vim with
> > the --startuptime option to get a better idea of where the slowdown
> > is. See ":help --startuptime".
> >
> > For example, starting vim on my C
On 2023-07-17, Manas wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 16, 2023 at 10:55:04AM -0700, Gary Johnson wrote:
> > It depends, of course, on why it is slow. You can start vim with
> > the --startuptime option to get a better idea of where the slowdown
> > is. See ":help --startuptime".
> >
> > For example, starti
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
On Sun, Jul 16, 2023 at 10:55:04AM -0700, Gary Johnson wrote:
> It depends, of course, on why it is slow. You can start vim with
> the --startuptime option to get a better idea of where the slowdown
> is. See ":help --startuptime".
>
> For example, starting vim on my Cygwin system was really sl
Manas wrote:
> Hey folks, today I ran hyperfine on vim and found my startuptime is way
> too slow.
>
> Benchmark 1: /usr/bin/vim
> Time (mean ± σ): 2.707 s ± 0.036 s[User: 0.598 s, System: 0.097 s]
> Range (min … max):2.674 s … 2.779 s10 runs
>
> Are there any tips on improv
On Sun, Jul 16, 2023 at 6:57 PM Manas wrote:
>
> Hey folks, today I ran hyperfine on vim and found my startuptime is way
> too slow.
>
> Benchmark 1: /usr/bin/vim
> Time (mean ± σ): 2.707 s ± 0.036 s[User: 0.598 s, System: 0.097 s]
> Range (min … max):2.674 s … 2.779 s10 run
On 2023-07-16, Manas wrote:
> Hey folks, today I ran hyperfine on vim and found my startuptime is way
> too slow.
>
> Benchmark 1: /usr/bin/vim
> Time (mean ± σ): 2.707 s ± 0.036 s[User: 0.598 s, System: 0.097 s]
> Range (min … max):2.674 s … 2.779 s10 runs
>
>
> Are there
Hey folks, today I ran hyperfine on vim and found my startuptime is way
too slow.
Benchmark 1: /usr/bin/vim
Time (mean ± σ): 2.707 s ± 0.036 s[User: 0.598 s, System: 0.097 s]
Range (min … max):2.674 s … 2.779 s10 runs
Are there any tips on improving this?
--
Manas
--
-
16 matches
Mail list logo
