Re: Illegal C++

2005-10-11 Thread Han-Wen Nienhuys
Erik Sandberg wrote: To me, those property lists look like major bottlenecks (though I haven't done any real profiling). Especially the grob property alists: While I was debugging some time ago, I saw that Grob::internal_set_property was called over 1000 times in a trivial score. How would

Re: Illegal C++

2005-10-11 Thread Erik Sandberg
On Monday 10 October 2005 18.17, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: Wiz Aus wrote: Even if it did use pre-compiled scheme, because lilypond supports compiling scores that contain Scheme code, it would still require effectively interpretive processing, which is not doubt a large reason for it's

Re: Illegal C++

2005-10-11 Thread Hans Aberg
It's probably best not guessing what is efficient and not, but making some profiling in typical user situations. The thing is that a part might be slow, but if it is not used much, it is just a waste of programmer time to speed it up. Hans Aberg

Re: Illegal C++

2005-10-11 Thread Nicolas Sceaux
Erik Sandberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: To me, those property lists look like major bottlenecks (though I haven't done any real profiling). Especially the grob property alists: While I was debugging some time ago, I saw that Grob::internal_set_property was called over 1000 times in a trivial

Re: Illegal C++

2005-10-11 Thread Erik Sandberg
On Tuesday 11 October 2005 18.48, Nicolas Sceaux wrote: Erik Sandberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: To me, those property lists look like major bottlenecks (though I haven't done any real profiling). Especially the grob property alists: While I was debugging some time ago, I saw that

Re: Illegal C++

2005-10-10 Thread Wiz Aus
From: Nicolas Sceaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Wiz Aus [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: bug-lilypond@gnu.org Subject: Re: Illegal C++ Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 23:44:48 +0200 Wiz Aus [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: lilypond uses an interpretive language (Scheme) No. LilyPond uses an *implementation* of Scheme

Re: Illegal C++

2005-10-10 Thread Wiz Aus
From: Nicolas Sceaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Wiz Aus [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: bug-lilypond@gnu.org Subject: Re: Illegal C++ Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 01:42:29 +0200 Wiz Aus [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: From: Nicolas Sceaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wiz Aus [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: lilypond uses

Re: Illegal C++

2005-10-10 Thread Han-Wen Nienhuys
Wiz Aus wrote: Even if it did use pre-compiled scheme, because lilypond supports compiling scores that contain Scheme code, it would still require effectively interpretive processing, which is not doubt a large reason for it's less-than-blinding-fast operation. The problem is not so much in

Re: Illegal C++

2005-10-07 Thread Wiz Aus
From: Han-Wen Nienhuys [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Wiz Aus [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: bug-lilypond@gnu.org Subject: Re: Illegal C++ Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 12:33:10 +0200 Wiz Aus wrote: Ok, now I'm trying to actually play with the lilypond code -- but it seems to be full of completely illegal C++ - like

Re: Illegal C++

2005-10-07 Thread Paul Scott
Wiz Aus wrote: From: Han-Wen Nienhuys [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Wiz Aus [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: bug-lilypond@gnu.org Subject: Re: Illegal C++ Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 12:33:10 +0200 Wiz Aus wrote: Ok, now I'm trying to actually play with the lilypond code -- but it seems to be full of completely

Re: Illegal C++

2005-10-07 Thread Nicolas Sceaux
Wiz Aus [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: lilypond uses an interpretive language (Scheme) No. LilyPond uses an *implementation* of Scheme, namely guile, which only provides an interpreter, but no compiler, unlike many other Scheme implementations. Please do not widespread wrong clichés. nicolas

Re: Illegal C++

2005-10-07 Thread Nicolas Sceaux
Wiz Aus [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: From: Nicolas Sceaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wiz Aus [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: lilypond uses an interpretive language (Scheme) No. LilyPond uses an *implementation* of Scheme, namely guile, which only provides an interpreter, but no compiler, unlike many other

Re: Illegal C++

2005-10-06 Thread Han-Wen Nienhuys
Wiz Aus wrote: Ok, now I'm trying to actually play with the lilypond code -- but it seems to be full of completely illegal C++ - like trying to cast class member functions to standalone functions etc. etc. The cases I've found so far are all very easy to fix, just by adding proxy function

Re: Illegal C++

2005-10-06 Thread Han-Wen Nienhuys
Wiz Aus wrote: Ok, now I'm trying to actually play with the lilypond code -- but it seems to be full of completely illegal C++ - like trying to cast class member functions to standalone functions etc. etc. The cases I've found so far are all very easy to fix, just by adding proxy function

Illegal C++

2005-10-05 Thread Wiz Aus
Ok, now I'm trying to actually play with the lilypond code -- but it seems to be full of completely illegal C++ - like trying to cast class member functions to standalone functions etc. etc. The cases I've found so far are all very easy to fix, just by adding proxy function definitions