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
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
