▲ | iberator 5 days ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Back in the 486 era? same here hehe ksh for life :p | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
▲ | klibertp 4 days ago | parent [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
It takes 3.5 seconds for a new login shell to open on my laptop, which has a decent CPU and a fast SSD. I do have quite a few lines of config, but no oh-my-zsh and almost no plugins. I have around 2k SLOC of ZSH config. Meanwhile, I have 22.3k SLOC of Emacs Lisp config, and Emacs starts up (granted, after lowering bytecode to native code AOT) in ~4 seconds. To me, that suggests there's something really wrong with ZSH in terms of performance - unfortunately, it's better in almost every other way compared to BASH, so I learned to live with that. Still, at least in my setup, ZSH indeed is slow, even on modern hardware. I wonder if it would even run on a 486... | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|