On 2 août 2012, at 18:18, Lucas Gonze wrote: > On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 8:04 AM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling > <joseph.wakel...@webdrake.net> wrote: >> More generally than that, I think the reason to discuss is to _discover_ the >> areas where you can cooperate. There are obvious areas of interaction -- >> e.g. enabling Lilypond output for MuseScore and ensuring that it gets >> updated effectively in response to Lilypond syntax changes. > > I have considered using Lilypond as a back end for front end hacking, > but the compile time from .ly to .svg is way too high. > > Is it architecturally possible to make a significant amount of > overhead go away? Are incremental compiles plausible? >
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. Cheers, MS _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user