Re: [textadept] Textadept 5.0 alpha

From: mitchell <>
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 10:26:20 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)


On Thu, 29 Dec 2011, Robert wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 3:39 PM, mitchell <> wrote:
>> Robert,
>> On Thu, 22 Dec 2011, Robert wrote:
>>> Just a note and question for OS X:
>>> Having old "module"-style stuff loaded crashes Textadept, with a clean
>>> user home, there were no problems.
>> I think this occurs on all platforms...
> Might be worth considering leaving the 'module'-switch on, at least
> for a while. A module not loading properly might be easier to debug
> than a crashing program. On OS X and Windows users likely don't even
> get to see terminal output to see a error message.

I have added a FAQ entry for hard crashes when upgrading. Even if the
switch was on for some time, it's likely that some users may have been
out of the loop and will experience the same thing when 'module' is turned

> Another data point (and request to include LuaJIT builds), I started a
> session with all files in scintilla/src. Comparing loading times with
> and without Lua JIT, the jitted TA starts ~1.5 sec faster. (I added a
> _G.quit in init.lua).
> It's not nano vs. Eclipse start up time, but it does add up. :-)

I think I'm in favor of leaving jit in future releases as an option, but I
worry the Lua 5.1 vs Lua 5.2 descrepancy could be problematic.


> time ./textadept -u ~/tmp/ta5beta/
> real 0m2.172s
> user 0m1.924s
> sys 0m0.098s
> time ./textadept -u ~/tmp/ta5beta/
> real 0m3.748s
> user 0m3.498s
> sys 0m0.095s
> Robert
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "textadept" group.
> To post to this group, send email to
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> For more options, visit this group at

Received on Wed 25 Jan 2012 - 10:26:20 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Thu 08 Mar 2012 - 12:28:10 EST