hi, i used ubuntu, machines with 2 or 4 GB RAM resp.
have to use minimal-breaking would be very disappointing...
actually i just wanted to inform that some things not only happen in
extreme artificial test cases... and that this breaking thing seems pretty
much suboptimal in both optical result as in resource consumption...
yours, arno
On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 11:59:55 +0200, Valentin Villenave
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Arno Waschk <[email protected]> wrote:
well, i came across this problem while creating a *real-world* score,
having
1600+ bars and using GBs of memory. it also showed horrible "compiling"
times before Joe created his patches as well. while experimenting a bit
with
it, i could not find a significant difference between the real-world
score,
and a \repeat unfold 1600+ fake score.
[I take it you forgot to include the list]
Interesting. What operating system were you using? How much RAM?
Also, one thing I probably should have mentioned is that the
ly:minimal-breaking algorithm is often mandatory in such demanding
compilations.
Cheers,
Valentin.
--
Erstellt mit Operas revolutionärem E-Mail-Modul: http://www.opera.com/mail/
_______________________________________________
bug-lilypond mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
