2017-03-06 21:41 GMT+01:00 Andy Wingo <wi...@pobox.com>:
> On Sun 05 Mar 2017 15:01, Thomas Morley <thomasmorle...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Here some timing values
>>
>> (1)
>> lilypond-2.19.52 using guile 1.8.7
>> (I would have prefered to build lilypond with a guile-1.8.8 build from
>> the guile-repository. Though my try to build it from the
>> branch_release-1-8 failed. Instead attempting to fix it, I then used a
>> released lilypond-version)
>>
>> real 8m16.191s
>> user 6m39.864s
>> sys 0m10.860s
>>
>> (2)
>> guile-2.0.14 build from guile-git-repository, branch
>> remotes/origin/stable-2.0
>> lilypond-2.19.56, build from local branch dev/guile-v2.2-work
>>
>> real 34m11.762s
>> user 45m11.316s
>> sys 0m5.604s
>>
>> (3)
>> guile-2.1.7 build from guile-git-repository, branch master
>> (I've got this warning:
>> configure: WARNING: *** GNU Readline is too old on your system.
>> configure: WARNING: *** You need readline version 2.1 or later.
>> No idea whether this may have an impact on lilyponds compiling-time
>> I'll have to test.)
>> lilypond-2.19.56, build from local branch dev/guile-v2.2-work
>>
>> real 67m29.132s
>> user 93m14.812s
>> sys 0m7.332s
>
> Oh, that's interesting. IME the only thing that is slower on 2.2
> compared to 2.0 is the compiler; everything else is significantly
> faster. Could it be that Lilypond is spending time compiling things
> somehow? Perhaps via scm_load without disabling autocompilation or
> something? Guessing at this point tho.
At least git-grepping for scm_load inthe lilypond-repository returns nothing.
>
> But that's getting ahead of myself -- do you have a document that
> exhibits a similar performance series (1.8 < 2.0 < 2.2) but which
> doesn't take so long to run? That can make perf investigation a bit
> more tractable :)
>
> Andy
Attached you'll find short-lily-guile-test.ly.
Two overrides, foo and fooI, are defined to show embedding lily in
guile and vice versa as well as some simple string-operations.
(The overrides themselves print silly things, but it's typical
user-generated code, just to demonstrate the method)
Below you'll find timing values for lilypond with guile 1.8.7, 2.0.14 and 2.1.7.
Those three lily-versions are tested without foo and fooI, with foo
and with foo _and_ fooI
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
lilypond 2.19.56 guile 1.8.7
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
real 0m2.207s
user 0m2.120s
sys 0m0.076s
with foo:
real 0m6.707s
user 0m6.336s
sys 0m0.372s
with foo and fooI:
real 0m9.749s
user 0m9.268s
sys 0m0.472s
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
lilypond 2.19.57 guile 2.0.14
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
real 0m11.843s
user 0m12.452s
sys 0m0.172s
with foo:
real 0m34.020s
user 0m35.284s
sys 0m0.168s
with foo and fooI:
real 0m38.819s
user 0m40.020s
sys 0m0.396s
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
lilypond 2.19.57 guile 2.1.7
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
real 0m8.594s
user 0m9.424s
sys 0m0.180s
with foo:
real 0m14.626s
user 0m15.924s
sys 0m0.204s
with foo and fooI:
real 0m19.422s
user 0m20.960s
sys 0m0.304s
So guile 2.1.7 is indeed faster than 2.0.14 with this test-file, otoh
I've redone testings with the other file and can confirm 2.1.7 being
slower there.
Currently I've no clue why.
Btw, I've improved my local setup to be able to test lilypond more
quickly with different guile versions. Though I wasn't able to compile
1.8.8, neither from the repository nor from the tarball downloaded
from
https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/download/
Due to:
async.c: In function 'scm_i_queue_async_cell':
async.c:243:14: error: variable 'count' set but not used
[-Werror=unused-but-set-variable]
size_t count;
^
Am I missing something?
I'm aware noone is interested in developing 1.8.8 further, though I
would have prefered to build lilypond with that version as well, like
the other test-versions.
Cheers,
Harm
\version "2.19.56"
%% Two overrides, attempting to demonstrate/trigger how embedding lily in guile
%% and vice versa works.
%% Both doing some simple string-operations
foo = {
\override Score.BarNumber.break-visibility = ##(#t #t #t)
\override Score.BarNumber.before-line-breaking =
#(lambda (grob)
(let ((b-nmbr
(string->number (markup->string (ly:grob-property grob 'text)))))
(ly:grob-set-property! grob 'self-alignment-X CENTER)
(ly:grob-set-property! grob 'text
#{
\markup
#(if (and (number? b-nmbr) (odd? b-nmbr))
(format #f "guile ~a" (version))
(format #f "lilypond ~a" (lilypond-version)))
#})))
}
fooII =
\override NoteHead.after-line-breaking =
#(lambda (grob)
(if (positive?
(ly:pitch-octave
(ly:prob-property (ly:grob-property grob 'cause) 'pitch)))
(begin
(ly:grob-set-property! grob 'stencil
(ly:stencil-aligned-to
(grob-interpret-markup grob
#{
\markup #(string-concatenate '("名" "字" "-" "♥" "-" "字" "名"))
#})
CENTER
X))
(ly:grob-set-property! grob 'color red))
(ly:grob-set-property! grob 'color green)))
{
%% successively uncomment:
%\foo
%\fooII
\repeat unfold 20 { \repeat unfold 4 { c'4 e' g' c'' } \break }
}
