Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 20 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #5712

    thylocene
    Member

    Hi
    I have downloaded an eval copy of the EmEditor to compare against other editors (I am looking for a good fast replacement for notepad). Whilst I can see great potential in the program, I am finding it a bit slow when compared to other products that I have tried such as textpad, notepad++, etc. for things like paging through large text files, search and replace etc. For example textpad is 2 x to 3 x faster at search and replace and much faster at paging.

    My question is do you guys aim to address this in the near future?

    #5713

    Yutaka Emura
    Keymaster

    thylocene wrote:
    Hi
    I have downloaded an eval copy of the EmEditor to compare against other editors (I am looking for a good fast replacement for notepad). Whilst I can see great potential in the program, I am finding it a bit slow when compared to other products that I have tried such as textpad, notepad++, etc. for things like paging through large text files, search and replace etc. For example textpad is 2 x to 3 x faster at search and replace and much faster at paging.

    My question is do you guys aim to address this in the near future?

    First, a few simple questions: What is the typical size of text file you are trying to page or search/replace? Have you changed any settings on the Advanced tab of the Customize dialog box (on the Tools menu)? We certainly want to optimize the speed in all cases.

    #5716

    thylocene
    Member

    Hi
    The size of the text file is around 26 Mb (around 119,000 lines). EmEditor settings are out-of-the-box. In all cases each editor I have tested is with the same file, window size etc,etc.

    #5724

    Yutaka Emura
    Keymaster

    thylocene wrote:
    Hi
    The size of the text file is around 26 Mb (around 119,000 lines). EmEditor settings are out-of-the-box. In all cases each editor I have tested is with the same file, window size etc,etc.

    I am trying to reproduce your issue, but please let me know more details:

    – what is your search term?

    – “Match Case”, “Escape Sequence”, “Regular Expressions”?

    – Did you select “Wrap by Window” or “Wrap by Characters”?

    – If possible, please email me a sample file (after zipped) at tech@emurasoft.com

    I will try to reproduce, and will cerntainly try to fix your issue.

    Thank you.

    #5737

    thylocene
    Member

    As I said, my settings were out-of-the-box.

    Search and replace string did not include regex

    ex. Replace AND with XXXXXXXXXX

    Pretty simple

    My environment is Vista 64-bit, but I do not think that has anything to do with it since the other programs are 32-bit as well so some thunking should be taking place.

    #5742

    Yutaka Emura
    Keymaster

    thylocene wrote:
    As I said, my settings were out-of-the-box.

    Search and replace string did not include regex

    ex. Replace AND with XXXXXXXXXX

    Pretty simple

    My environment is Vista 64-bit, but I do not think that has anything to do with it since the other programs are 32-bit as well so some thunking should be taking place.

    I have 1 million line text (81MB), and did a simple replace (Replace “abc” with “XXXXXXXXXX”). In my machine it took about 8 seconds (when “Match Case” is off), and 3 seconds (when “Match Case” is on). Is this comparable to your results? You might want to try “Match Case” on, since this changes the speed dramatically. I will still look into more details. Thank you!

    #5759

    thylocene
    Member

    Hi

    I have carried out some more testing. Sorry for the time lag but I only seem to get time on weekends nowadays. Your suggestion of using Match Case is really not usable since in most cases I don’t really care about the case of a search / replace string.

    In my testing the target file is a plain text file with 1 million lines (137 Mb)

    9/05/2008 19:30 137,109,008 target.txt
    137,109,008 bytes in 1 file and 0 dirs 137,109,504 bytes allocated

    The host is Windows XP SP2 with 2 GB of ram. I am replacing the word Feature with abcD – 7112 occurences. I have carried out the test with three editors; Textpad, Notepad++ 4.8.5, and emEditor v7.00.5. I carried out the tests several times and then averaged the results. As you can see Textpad is the outright winner. Its no case matching search and replace is actually faster than emEdit with Case matching. At the moment Textpad gets my vote.

    Textpad 5.0.3 32-bit:
    No case matching: 5 secs
    Match case: 3 secs

    Notepad++:
    No case matching: 47 secs
    Match case: 14 secs

    EmEditor v7.00.5
    No case matching: 36 secs
    Match case: 7 secs

    Cheers

    thylocene

    #5761

    Yutaka Emura
    Keymaster

    I have 1 million line US-ASCII text (80.9MB), and the content is:


    1-abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz
    2-abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz
    3-abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz
    ...

    I replaced “abc” with “XXXXXXXXXX”. That means there are 2 tokens in each line to replace when case matching, or 3 tokens when no case matching, total of 2 (or 3 ) million tokens in the entire file. The host is Windows XP SP2 (English) in Virtual PC 2007 (within Windows Vista 64-bit Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600, 8GB RAM). All software programs are freshly installed.

    Here is my result:

    Textpad 5.2.0 32-bit
    No case matching: 34 sec
    Match case: 22 sec

    Notepad++ 4.7.5
    No case matching: 10 min 3 sec
    Match case: 6 min 32 sec

    EmEditor Professional 7.00.5
    No case matching: 9 sec
    Match case: 5 sec

    Thus, EmEditor Professional was the fastest of all these three. I also found something noteworthy: Only EmEditor allows you to cancel replacing during the operation. Other programs do not allow you to abort once you hit “Replace All” until the operation is finished. TextPad does not allow you open Unicode files (such as Japanese characters) correctly (it opens but converts Unicode characters into a substitute character “?”). I wanted to compare Unicode files, but couldn’t because of this.

    I don’t know why you have the different result. Maybe because you have only a few tokens to replace, or your file might be encoded in a different encoding. This is the reason it would be more helpful if you could email me your sample file so I can reproduce your issue. Is your Windows system encoding English? (You can find out from Control Panel > Regional Language Options > Advanced tab – “Language for non-Unicode programs”)

    #5762

    gan
    Participant

    I’m a textpad and emeditor user as well so i found this a bit interesting and did some testing on my computer as well which is a laptop with 2.4GHz Core Duo (T7700) with 2gb RAM running English Windows Vista SP1 (32-bit). Regional settings and keyboard is set to Norwegian.

    Info about the file:
    Filesize: 113mb
    Lines: 2183617
    10608 entries to replace

    Emeditor 7.00.5:
    Open file: 4.9 sec
    No case match: 20 sec
    Case match: 3.5 sec
    (Everything else unchecked)

    Textpad 5.2:
    Open file: 1.1 sec
    No case match: 1.5 sec
    Case match: 1.1 sec
    (Text and Active documents selected and everything else unchecked.)

    So my results is the same as thylocene where textpad is much faster for this operation. Maybe the dialogbox that show the progress using emeditor is the reason why textpad is so much faster since textpad does not show the progress like that?

    I’m aware of lack of unicode support using textpad and while emeditor is able to open files with unlimited size textpad is very limited…..that is a couple of the reasons why i need two text editors.

    Regards
    Gan

    #5777

    chabulier
    Member

    it’s true.
    In my local test. 2G mem T60
    File Size: 114M
    Total Lines: 1,183,428
    search “INFO”
    replace with “[INFORMATION]”
    Matched 63,158
    not match case
    both open blank display

    TextPad 5.2
    2.60 secs
    EmEditor 7.05
    25~26 secs

    However Emeditor give more function:
    1) process bar and highlight.
    2) emeditor empty display more pretty.
    3) Emeditor’s fronts support customize looks more better.
    4) Emeditor can open huge files, but Textpad have a limit.

    #5778

    Yutaka Emura
    Keymaster

    The point is the number of tokens (occurrences). If you have a million of tokens to replace, you will see EmEditor is faster. Also, it is not fair to compare EmEditor with a non-Unicode text editor. There is a big difference between ANSI comparison and Unicode comparison.

    #5780

    gan
    Participant

    I did a test on the same file, but with 1129344 entries to replace and as you said in this case emeditor is faster without any doubt…..especially when “Match case” is checked.

    I don’t know if textpad use ANSI comparison or not, but if that is the case i guess it can make a difference as well as you also said.

    In any case i don’t find the speed to be a problem for either of them so it was never mean’t as a complaint…..just an observation.

    Regards
    Gan

    #5781

    Yutaka Emura
    Keymaster

    gan wrote:
    I did a test on the same file, but with 1129344 entries to replace and as you said in this case emeditor is faster without any doubt…..especially when “Match case” is checked.

    I don’t know if textpad use ANSI comparison or not, but if that is the case i guess it can make a difference as well as you also said.

    In any case i don’t find the speed to be a problem for either of them so it was never mean’t as a complaint…..just an observation.

    Regards
    Gan

    I’ve played around with the source code, and succeeded to optimize the Replace function. The next minor version (7.00.7) will become much faster than previous versions (about 5X faster when ignoring case, and 2X faster when matching case in my test).

    #5782

    gan
    Participant

    Yutaka wrote:

    I’ve played around with the source code, and succeeded to optimize the Replace function. The next minor version (7.00.7) will become much faster than previous versions (about 5X faster when ignoring case, and 2X faster when matching case in my test).

    Nice work. Even if the current version is working great it’s always nice when it’s enhanced further.

    Thanks
    Gan

    #5836

    doctorow
    Participant

    7.00.7 is out. Has anyone tested and compared it to the previous versions?

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 20 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Share with friends... Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Email this to someone