[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > To spur the adoption of LilyPond 2.3, I have decided to give 2.3 yet
> > another bonus-point over 2.2. The latest development release sports
> > the long-awaited rewrite of the slur code.
>
> This might indeed be a reason to switch. What about backporting? :-)
Yes, that's a cool idea. Why don't you give it a try :-)
> > In the meantime, Jan has been preparing for sleepless nights to come
> > by rewriting our build system. Hopefully, we will switch LilyPond
> > to Scons (www.scons.org) in the near future, thus obviating the
> > baroque counterpoint of autoconf, make, stepmake and libtool.
>
> I'm following those changes with mild interest, waiting whether it
> really is as promising as you say. Compare this with your enthusiasm
> for C++ at the beginning...
What, me? I've been suppressing those memories with all my
might. Don't bring them back. :-)
the Scons format is very promising, the files are short, and simply
written in Python
$ wc configure.in aclocal.m4 `find -name 'GNUmakefile' -or -name '*.make'` |
tail -1
5103 14214 138250 totaal
$ wc `find -name 'SCons*'`|tail -1
1174 3841 34126 totaal
the worrying point is performance. An up-to-dateness check of the
lily directory takes about 14 seconds, vs. 0.7 seconds for Make. I
hope that this will further improve.
--
Han-Wen Nienhuys | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
