vim-startuptime VS startuptime.vim

That is native and inbuild but I would suggest below options instead 1. Using lazy's Profile tab instead https://github.com/folke/lazy.nvim 2. Using a dedicated plugin to do this https://github.com/dstein64/vim-startuptime. 3. Using an external program hyperfine is one that I use https://github.com/sharkdp/hyperfine

This plugin https://github.com/dstein64/vim-startuptime

dstein64/vim-startuptime (which I never use, my startup time is under 130ms, which is sufficient)

Use the plugin with the flag --tries 100. Also, what are the first 10 lines of output from running the above command? I'll start.

only today I tried this plug to test startup time and got this result:

dstein64/vim-startuptime: ⏲️ A Vim plugin for profiling Vim's startup time.

Using vim-startuptime to profile, I get these startup numbers on an Apple M1 Macbook:

Oh sorry, I already solved my issue but forgot to delete the post! But to answer your question: Of course! It's https://github.com/dstein64/vim-startuptime. You can either launch nvim with nvim --startuptime outputfile.log FILENAME to get detailed diagnostics in the file outputfile.log or just call :StartupTime after nvim/vim has started up to get this graph. It's pretty neat and easy to use!

You could try to install this plugin temporarily : https://github.com/dstein64/vim-startuptime

You could use https://github.com/tweekmonster/startuptime.vim. Then you can run :StartupTime -- big-file.txt

tweekmonster/startuptime.vim is inaccurate. I think it doesn't take Lua into account. Don't use this plugin.

I recently had a look at startup performance. Using the startuptime plugin both moonfly & nightfly were taking around 4.5ms to load on my quad-core Linux desktop (not too bad for traditional Vimscript-based colorschemes). Some profiling did indicate that clearing highlights and resetting syntax are actually quite expensive. We really don't need to do either when loading a colorscheme at Vim start time; it is only really needed when changing colorschemes within an existing edit session. Putting in a simple guard results in moonfly & nightfly now taking only 2.5ms to startup (on my machine).

Lastly, I also had a look at startup performance. Using the startuptime plugin both moonfly & nightfly were taking around 4.5ms to load on my quad-core Linux desktop (not too bad for Vimscript-based colorschemes). Some profiling did indicate that clearing highlights and resetting syntax are actually quite expensive. We really don't need to do either when loading a colorscheme at Neovim start time; it is only really needed when changing colorschemes within an existing edit session. Putting in a simple guard results in moonfly & nightfly now taking only 2.5ms to startup (on my machine). That is quite similar to some of the nice new Lua-based Neovim colorschemes now available. A win, albeit a small one.

Using the :StartupTime provided by https://github.com/tweekmonster/startuptime.vim ...