terse editor

[dsr at tao.merseine.nu]

On Fri, Feb 11, 2005 at 10:18:31PM -0500, David Hummel wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 11, 2005 at 09:24:07PM -0500, David Kramer wrote:
> > 
> > There are lots of people who prefer vi, and call emacs "an operating
> > system that can edit files".  Some admins will refuse to install emacs
> > because it takes up so much memory.
> 
> The memory footprint of GNU emacs is quite a bit higher than vim.  This
> is for a 16229 byte file I was just editing:
> 
> $ ps aux | head -1; ps aux | egrep 'emacs|vim'
> USER       PID %CPU %MEM   VSZ  RSS TTY      STAT START   TIME COMMAND
> hummel    4088  0.0  0.2  5224 2640 pts/1    S+   22:12   0:00 vim hybselect.cgi
> hummel    4103  0.4  0.7 11532 7384 pts/2    S    22:12   0:00 emacs -bg black -fg green hybselect.cgi

Regardless of efficiency, neither one counts as a large program today.

USER       PID %CPU %MEM   VSZ  RSS TTY      STAT START   TIME
COMMAND
dsr       3063  0.6  5.7 106028 44632 ?      S    20:32   1:07 firefox-bin 
root      2783  1.7 18.7 180264 145408 ?     S    20:22   3:13 X
dsr       2940  0.0  3.2 44524 25592 ?       Ss   20:25   0:02 nautilus
dsr       2942  0.0  0.3  4852 2792 ?        Ss   20:25   0:00 xclock

That last one is there to point out that sometimes older
programs have their uses...

-dsr-

-- 
otg to sig here, move along.