impatient.nvim VS nixpkgs

You could use impatient.nvim or the new vim.loader module if you’re on nightly. Both work really well. I used impatient for a long time and it reduced my startup time by half. I’m using vim.loader now and it reduces it by about the same amount

The 20-30 ms promise depends on your hardware. In my case, vanilla Neovim takes about 18 ms to startup, so a realistic good startup time for my config is around 50-60 ms. Lines of code isn’t a great reference either because you could just lazy load a bunch of plugins and have more LoC but still better startup times. What I would recommend is using lazy.nvim or if you wanna stick with packer, then pairing it with impatient.nvim .

automatically caches all startup code before :h VimEnter or :h BufReadPre (basically what impatient.nvim does)

there is an amazing plugin called impatient.nvim that cache a lot of stuff and make other pluggins go so fast !

Try installing https://github.com/lewis6991/impatient.nvim first.

:lua vim.pretty_print(vim.mpack.decode(vim.mpack.encode({some = { thing = false }}))) used by impatient.nvim

Did you defined your [[ and ]] mappings in that file or just created it? the after directory runs at the end of your config so you can override this kind of settings. Maybe you are using impatient.nvim? From their README:

Are you using impatient.nvim? It caches lua modules. My startuptime with 72 plugins (including it) and zero lazy loading is 600ms.

I don't think so. The article is probably intended for the Nix community, so the author doesn't need to convince HN that something is going on. If as an outsider you are interested then you need to look into it yourself, the community has no obligation to make their internal conflicts legible to the outside world.

As an outsider myself, it certainly looks like something is going on as more than 20 Nixpkg maintainers left in a week: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues?q=label%3A%228.has%3...

https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commits?author=neon-sunset

I see two signers in the top 6 displayed on https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/graphs/contributors

For a single file script, nix can make the package management quite easy: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/doc/languages-f...

For example,

```

Yes, Nix doesn't actually ensure that the builds are deterministic. In fact it works just fine if they aren't. There are packages in nixpkgs that aren't reproducible: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aiss...

I'm not familiar with Bazel, but Nix in it's current form wouldn't have solved this attack. First of all, the standard mkDerivation function calls the same configure; make; make install process that made this attack possible. Nixpkgs regularly pulls in external resources (fetchUrl and friends) that are equally vulnerable to a poisoned release tarball. Checkout the comment on the current xz entry in nixpkgs https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/pkgs/tools/comp...

NixOS uses a monorepo and I think everyone's love it.

I love being able to easily grep through all the packages source code and there's regularly PRs that harmonizes conventions across many packages.

Nixpkgs doesn't include the packaged software source code, so it's a lot more practical than what Debian is doing.

https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs

In this specific case, nix uses fetchFromGitHub to download the source archive, which are generated by GitHub for the specified revision[1]. Arch seems to just download the tarball from the releases page[2].

[1]: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/3c2fdd0a4e6396fc310a6e...

[2]: https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/packaging/packages/ib...