False claims of being "fast", terrible design unable to handle files with long lines about ox HOT 7 CLOSED

If you're gonna complain, at least have the courtesy of demonstrating how it's slow.

For example:

When openning:

 base64 /dev/urandom | head -c 1000000000 > file.txt

I expect to open it in few seconds.
Instead it opened in a few minutes.

from ox.

When I said "fast", Ox was quite minimal recently, I've added many features and have therefore slowed it down. I plan in the very near future to optimise these features. Ox is still a work in progress and I don't recommend using it as a main editor, this is really just a personal project of mine and is in no way comparable to the mighty vim.

from ox.

@curlpipe it got top spot on HN, and I think people are taking that little blurb waaaaaaaaaaaay too seriously.

from ox.

compare with vim

from ox.

compare with vim

On what axis, in which way? When openining what? How?

You might as well as said, compare with chromium.

from ox.

issue #45 more constructive

from ox.

On what axis, in which way? When openining what? How?

Oh, meant no offense and wasn't clear. Was pointing out that one could compare your given code sample in both ´ox´ and ´vim´ to determine relative fastness or slowness.

If one where to claim that something is "fast", invariably, that is in comparison to something else.
Could be compared to Sublime Text, or VS Code, or whatnot. Just happen to like ´vim´.

Also a HN visitor, coming from Twitter, sucking at politeness. Good day.

from ox.