> Unless you're starting and stopping Vim hundreds of times per
> day, the amount of time it took to write that email and
> change the way you use CSApprox dwarfs the time savings
> you'll ever see from removing it from startup.
> I can see the OP wanting to reduce Vim startup below three
> seconds -- that's a perceptible delay. But the difference in
> startup time between .194 seconds and .060 seconds is barely
> noticeable.
> Probably counter-productive to my case, but if you want to see
> the difference:
> $ perl -lwe 'print 1; select "","","",0.194; print 2'
> $ perl -lwe 'print 1; select "","","",0.060; print 2'
> It's only noticeable if you're really focusing on it. It's
> pretty insignificant in the scope of other stuff that's
> happening (hitting enter or double-clicking, waiting for the
> window to redraw, etc. etc.).
i freely admit to being an unapologetic nit-picker -- i like
things to happen fast when i hit enter -- i do notice the
difference, especially when i'm paying attention, and if not
it's just a happy visceral response to a snappy machine
i am very sensitive to response times, having worked years on
IBM mainframes before moving on to other things
thanx to chris for pointing it out, not to mention matt's
diligence in creating a masterful plugin, i was able to create
a CSASnapshot of biogoo, re-de-install CSApprox, and now vim
starts in 63 milliseconds AND has all the colorful bells and
whistles -- the best of both worlds (i can keep cursorline
turned on for both gvim and vim)
sc
--
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
No comments:
Post a Comment