On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 9:22 AM, m...@apollinemike.com <m...@apollinemike.com> wrote: > It is very difficult. It's better to use a front-end editor that shows some > sorta mock-up of the score and that only compiles the nice LilyPond version > from time to time (if this exists). Getting an actual LilyPond score > requires calculating line breaks and there's no way to get rid of the > overhead. That said, we optimize all the time: I believe that for larger > scores w/ many staves, the current development version is faster than 2.14. > > As for the svg, significant improvement can be made in the speed of > LilyPond's svg export - contributions are certainly welcome in this area. > The backend is very well written but it is all in Scheme and can be quite > slow as it does not make reference to an external font file but rather draws > out every glyph.
It wouldn't make sense to have completely separate codebases for quick-and-dirty and slow-and-pretty. IMO this is the blocker. Lilypond's C could be converted to Javascript using Emscripten. Is there any hope of that working with the Scheme? _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user