Neovim has first class Lua support, so you can have vim without the viml

I think you would love Neovim

It takes a few seconds to boot up, even on my Ryzen 7 machine with 8 cores à 4GHz and 16GB RAM.

Booting up is normally not done so often, but also doing other stuff takes way too long for my taste (over the perceivable 300ms threshold).

> Emacs ran on hardware from the 1980’s. How can it be too slow on modern hardware?

Since then they've added millions of lines of ELisp code. The comparison is moot.

Also we are talking here about Emacs "distributions" (Spacemacs, Doom Emacs) which come with a lot of code, and ELisp is not particularly fast.

Emacs/Vim are fast, SpaceMacs/SpaceVim are slow. And buggy for spaceVim I would add.

Too much single-threading, loads of interpreted code and a display model that doesn't fit well (or really at all) with GUIs.

Does the current version run on 80's hardware? That's not a very useful comparison otherwise.

> How can it be too slow on modern hardware?

It can be, because it is :) If you want a really technical explanation, you can profile the application. If that is too much work, I'll generalise and say that the tendency for the UI to lock when performing CPU heavy computations makes it feel slow. Because of the things you will be asking it to do (i.e. solve modern problems), sometimes such computations exist and lead to blocks of 1s or more. That will never feel fast.

It isn't. I still use it once in a while on an old netbook with a couple of gigs of memory, and it flies for any editing task. In comparison, no IDE can even hope to run on that unit.

HOWEVER, a heavily and naively reconfigured emacs, possibly with uncompiled elisp code and copy-pasted invocations that wait for network responses could take ages to open.

If you are finding emacs to be slow, try it vanilla first ("--no-init-file") before deciding it's the program and not your configuration.