Atom 1.9 and 1.10 beta

Re:Atom 1.9 and 1.10 beta by halokonrad on Monday August 01, 2016 @05:59PM (#12206388)

VSCode from Microsoft is also wrapped in electron and uses a fraction of what Atom is consuming. Not being native has nothing to do here.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Atom 1.9 and 1.10 beta by PSeitz on Tuesday August 02, 2016 @05:22AM (#12208700)

The memory consumption is a magnitude larger in JavaScript than native.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Atom 1.9 and 1.10 beta by philtar on Tuesday August 02, 2016 @07:18AM (#12209080)

So what?

There are javascript editors that don't use as much memory as atom. What you're saying is irrelevant.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Atom 1.9 and 1.10 beta by PSeitz on Tuesday August 02, 2016 @04:01PM (#12212889)

So if this is hard to understand, the conclusion, in simple words:

the memory consumption for a javascript editor will be a magnitude bigger than native.

In my example 66Mb Sublime vs 620MB VS Code (no plugins)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Atom 1.9 and 1.10 beta by philtar on Saturday August 13, 2016 @11:48AM (#12281876)

halokonrad isn't talking about sublime. He's talking about Atom vs VS Code.

[ Parent | on HN ]