Re: why does M-w (kill-ring-save) hurt so bad?
On Tuesday, 17 December 2002, Georg Nikodym wrote:
On Tue, 17 Dec 2002 06:30:41 -0800
Jamie Zawinski <jwz(a)jwz.org> wrote:
> This is *progress*?
Amen. Thank you Jamie for your brutal (and massively entertaining)
injection of reality.
Huh.. You think slandering people who do the actual work is entertaining ?
Jamie might have a point but there are certainly nicer ways to put forth
one's views. Not that I think Ben would care much. You might also want to
read this:
http://www.666.com/stories/jamie-z.html
I similarly blew a gasket a couple of months ago about XEmacs'
memory
usage and general crappy performance. So I switched to GNU Emacs and
have been relatively happy since (mainly because I don't really give a
crap about the eye candy that XEmacs brings to the table)...
Do you seriously think posting messages like this will make XEmacs
developers go down on their knees and beg you to use XEmacs ?
In case anybody cares, the thing that drove me to the dark side:
objdump -d vmlinux > /tmp/vmlinux.S
load /tmp/vmlinux.S into XEmacs (with font-lock, lazy-lock/shot et al.)
Mine takes about 15 minutes and bloats to 140MB (this is a 1GHz laptop
with 512MB RAM).
Sorry your installation is broken.
samba % l /tmp/vmlinux.S
-rw-r--r-- 1 kitty student 25443631 Dec 17 12:12 /tmp/vmlinux.S
Loads instantaneously (less than 2 seconds) for me. Dual 933 Mhz PIII 512
MB RAM. top says a little over 25M. If you don't buy the argument, I just
tried it on my laptop (PIII 700 Mhz 256 MB RAM). Same time.
Under GNU Emacs loading this file is, by comparison, instantaneous
(and
only bloats the VM footprint by a little over the size of the file
itself).
I started using Lucid Emacs many years ago and it made me a more
productive programmer. I switched because feeding the beast was
interfering with my productivity.
You can use whatever editor you like. Don't blame it on XEmacs.
-kitty.