Hi Urs, My mistake. Once I had pulled all the changes compiling times were fine.
Craig On Sat, 14 Jul 2018 at 16:48, Urs Liska <li...@openlilylib.org> wrote: > Hi Craig, > > Am 14.07.2018 um 01:00 schrieb Craig Dabelstein: > > Hi Urs, > > Just confirming, as you've discovered, that compiling is lots slower. > > Craig > > > Could you please be more specific? This assessment is somewhat surprising > to me (although I wouldn't deny it's possible) because the slow-down *I* > was talking about was a substantial programming error that has by now been > fixed. > > Could you try to come up with some numbers? > > - Compilation time of the old system (with "old" input files) vs. > updated? > - Compilation time of a large score (not using annotations) with the > old or the new scholarLY module loaded or not loaded > - Is the slow-down noticeably related to the size of the score or to > the number of annotations? > > I know there *is* some overhead because I realized I have to store *all* > grobs in a list before processing the annotations, which wasn't previously > the case. But I wouldn't expect this to make a significant difference. > > I wouldn't have had any suspicion that my other changes to the code would > have any negative performance impact, quite the contrary. > > Thanks for testing > Urs > -- *Craig Dabelstein* Maxime's Music craig.dabelst...@gmail.com *http://maximesmusic.com <http://maximesmusic.com>*
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
