So if you compare a diesel to a petrol-hybrid, and you use the diesel's NEDC rating and compare it to the hybrid's WLTP rating, then number bigger!
Lets make a real comparison: The NEDC combined rating for the 2025 e-POWER is 5.4l/100km (FWD). The 2018 diesel version you linked uses 5.6l/100km, and the petrol 2018 version uses 6.2l/100km.
For a truly fair comparison you could have looked at the non-e-power versions from 2025, which come in at 7.4l/100km.
e-POWER listed data is massaged NEDC rating. Real life users report closer to 7L combined cycle for 2025 e-POWER model, and it goes all the way to 10L pure long highway driving (no recuperation). In contrast diesel model does the sticker mileage.
That's still (usually) the public paying for it. Parking permits are generally hilariously cheap compared to the market value of the land they reserve.
> Parking permits are generally hilariously cheap compared to the market value of the land they reserve.
The "reserved" land is a street: what else is it going to be used for except transportation?
The house I'm in was built before cars were even invented (1890s) and there were streets then, but even as early as 1907 cars were being used (there are photographs of my neighbourhood with them).
The people that complain about 'free parking' conveniently forget that land owners pay property taxes, vehicle and fuel taxes, and other taxes which go to maintaining the public roads. So it's not free. And society built a lot of infrastructure which requires most people to own a car in order to survive in it. That sort of bitching is the classic case where you shift blame to individuals for systematic issues beyond their control. And how much blame people get depends on class of course.
> The people that complain about 'free parking' conveniently forget that land owners pay property taxes, vehicle and fuel taxes, and other taxes which go to maintaining the public roads. So it's not free.
A common resource that is unmetered just ends up being abused. There's lots of data on this, e.g.:
And I'm not sure if the various taxes that are paid actually cover the costs of all the roads (never mind the externalities causing climate change). Certainly there is a lot of public utility to paved roads/highways such that some level of 'subsidy' is probably warranted, but I think that congestion pricing needs to be done a lot more too:
I guess experiences differ across companies and industries. I work in logistics. Logistics deals with messy processes and a messy reality all the time. A tiny fraction of that is due to buggy software. Some of it could be avoided with great software, but again: that we also didn’t have before LLMs
If you compare like for like, ie. take the process node out of the picture, then you need to compare the Ryzen 9000 series to the A16, as both use TSMC's 4NP process.
We put a fair amount of effort into reducing our resource footprint, so I'm curious what you find lacking in our memory management. From a quick test we use a similar amount of memory to Zed.
Hard to compare the two programs over a week of uptime. ST memory usage does get larger as caches get filled over time, but I've had uptimes of months without issue. I'd expect similar results from other editors.
Do you have a specific memory issue where it keeps using more over time?
General issue, have observed it on multiple systems. On a long enough timescale, will grow to farcical amounts of memory usage.
Unfortunately, while this is something I've observed through major point releases and on different platforms, there have always been some plugins in use.
UnUnfortunately not enough commonality in configuration or hours in the day to track down if this would happen on a totally clean install...
I'm sure your roadmap is quite extensive, but it would be great if sublime itself could graph or warn when memory usage increased by some specified percentage, or if any particular plugin spikes resource usage.
Plugins are a frequent culprit of issues like this. Depending on how you're tracking memory usage you may already be able to at least narrow down the culprit by looking at which process is using too much; plugins run on a separate process and may launch additional processes from there.
Unfortunately tracking individual plugin memory usage is not possible without invasive (and slow) tracing. If the plugins are causing big memory usage in the main process it can be hard to nail down due to that state being shared between all plugins.
Long term prospects for Sublime Text look good. The business is healthy and there is consistent work being done by a small but dedicated team.
As for why specific issues aren't addressed, it's merely a prioritization thing. It's a large task, and I'm sure if you asked 100 people they'd all give you different answers for which "basic usability" thing needs to be addressed.
There's premature optimisation, where you write a whole bunch of complicated code to avoid cloning an Arc<>. And then there's "premature optimisation" where you skip any consideration for performance until it becomes a problem.
The latter is usually what people who use the quote "premature optimisation is the root of all evil" think it means. Don't just keep calm and clone, consider what you're cloning and why, and then hopefully we won't end up with even more horribly slow software.
"Keep calm and clone" is a good advice for beginners. Then it is also a good advice for experts - because when you're an expert and you just think of cloning, that probably means it is easier than borrowing which you would default to.
> Programmers waste enormous amounts of time thinking about, or worrying about, the speed of noncritical parts of their programs, and these attempts at efficiency actually have a strong negative impact when debugging and maintenance are considered. We should forget about small efficiencies, say about 97% of the time: premature optimization is the root of all evil. Yet we should not pass up our opportunities in that critical 3%.
Notice the aspects and the reasons for knuth's "premature optimization". Is it making the code harder to debug and read? Is it a non-critical path?
If an optimization doesn't impact readability or debugability (for example, picking a datastructure that fits the problem instead of just using a List for everything). Then you should do it.
I see the quote so often pulled by people that want to justify inserting a n^2 algorithm when a log(n) solution is either the same amount of code or 1 line extra.
There's also important context about the era knuth was programming in. Optimization in the era of knuth was targeting the hardware and tickling things like the CPU cache and memory in a very specific way. It was things like clever bit manipulation and packing to save memory. That's the context. In modern terms it'd be "don't use SIMD intrinsics until you know you need them". It wouldn't be "Don't think about algorithmic complexity" which is where I most often see that kludge deployed.
Lets make a real comparison: The NEDC combined rating for the 2025 e-POWER is 5.4l/100km (FWD). The 2018 diesel version you linked uses 5.6l/100km, and the petrol 2018 version uses 6.2l/100km.
For a truly fair comparison you could have looked at the non-e-power versions from 2025, which come in at 7.4l/100km.
reply