Hi,
On Sat, 26 Jun 2010 19:20:55 +0200, Joe Neeman <joenee...@gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks, I've reverted the patch in the meantime. However, the
information that you see in annotate-spacing is actually computed after
line-breaking,
ok, so why can't it then be taken into account for page-breaking?
i mean, for me it seems that it is just the decision of which staves have
to be pushed onto the next page,
which is somehow going wrong, although the necessary information for it
seems to exist, at some point at least...
and so the additional computations in the patch aren't
actually redundant (the problem is that they aren't cached sensibly and
they aren't actually correct to begin with).
Since it more than doubles the computation time (often by far) there must
be something redundant, no?
Cheers, Arno
Cheers,
Joe
On Sat, 2010-06-26 at 13:49 +0200, Arno Waschk wrote:
git bisect says:
891840d4b25b71e9caac50174077d6461bb5cc7f is the first bad commit
commit 891840d4b25b71e9caac50174077d6461bb5cc7f
Author: Joe Neeman <joenee...@gmail.com>
Date: Mon Jun 21 23:11:42 2010 +0300
Fix 1062.
Include RehearsalMark, etc. in the pure-height of
pre-line-breaking
systems.
:040000 040000 cae0eb5e9239895c58000fad019b97f143e2fb62
86f3c1c0274256aa8a1a90eba0685f3abf1cc82e M lily
for the matter of suddenly horribly long "compiling" times.
yours, arno
p. s. if i understood correctly the underlying patch (an i most
certainly
do NOT) i would have the feeling it introduces calculations of
information
which already seems to be known to lily, when looking at the
annotate-spacing output of earlier versions...
On Sat, 26 Jun 2010 11:29:39 +0200, Arno Waschk <hamama...@gmx.de>
wrote:
> will try to find out, but in the moment i am searching an old version
> which does in general not have the problem i am facing...
>
> the rumor of it appearing between 2.13.18 and 2.13.19 does not seem
> true...
>
> arno
>
> On Sat, 26 Jun 2010 11:03:24 +0200, Joe Neeman <joenee...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Ok, but do you know which commit it was? Also, can you send an
example
>> which demonstrates the problem? If it is a long score with many
>> \pageBreaks, then it might be due to fcc66561444b7.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Joe
>>
>> On Fri, 2010-06-25 at 23:56 +0200, Arno Waschk wrote:
>>> it appears compared to a "2.13.25" which i compiled some days ago
from
>>> git, so maybe that is before "real" 2.13.25....
>>>
>>> On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 20:00:04 +0200, Joe Neeman <joenee...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > On Fri, 2010-06-25 at 17:17 +0200, Arno Waschk wrote:
>>> >> oops, with lilypond from git i am getting "compiling" times
higher
>>> by a
>>> >> factor >10, and huge distances between staves! Bug of feature?
>>> >
>>> > It doesn't sound like a feature. Can you figure out when it was
>>> > introduced?
>>> >
>>> > Cheers,
>>> > Joe
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > lilypond-devel mailing list
>>> > lilypond-devel@gnu.org
>>> > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
--
Arno Waschk
+49-172-3149605
http://www.arnowaschk.de
upcoming projects:
Eggert: Bordellballade (WP) Dessau, Koblenz, Berlin
Schlingensief: Two new Projects (Burkina Faso, Brussels, Hamburg, Munich,
Mühlheim/Ruhr, Berlin)
Maxwell-Davies/Sciarrino: Miss Donnithorne's Maggot/Infinito Nero Berlin
Staatsoper
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
