Am Di., 13. Nov. 2018 um 01:12 Uhr schrieb Mikael Djurfeldt
<mik...@djurfeldt.com>:
>
> It would be nice to have guile-1.8 in that list since some users stayed at
> that version due to 2.0 being slower.
As does LilyPond...
> Maybe, in time, we can get everyone back to the most recent release. :-))
I wrote some own test-code.
To be absolutely clear, this code is silly and terrible and
accumulates expensive procedures done again and again..
If I would see something like that I'd usually shout: "Man, are you crazy??"
Nevertheless, I post it here (and the results) to expose the
string-problem, which LilyPond still fights with (among others).
(begin
(use-modules (srfi srfi-1))
(let ((ls '()))
(for-each
(lambda (x)
(set! ls
(cons
(string-append "'" (object->string (eval-string "'(a b c)")))
ls
)))
(iota 10000))
(set! ls (delete-duplicates ls))
(write (version))))
Invoked with
$ time guile-whatever-version path/to/file
"1.8.8"
real 0m0,471s
user 0m0,446s
sys 0m0,018s
"2.0.14"
real 0m3,141s
user 0m3,595s
sys 0m0,111s
"2.2.4.9-71f536"
real 0m1,406s
user 0m1,633s
sys 0m0,063s
"2.9.1"
real 0m1,385s
user 0m1,615s
sys 0m0,033s
For this code guilev1 beats all others, although guile-2.9.1 is much
faster than 2.0.14
As said, it's a worse test, exposing a guilev2 weakness.
And ofcourse not the only problem LilyPond is facing with guilev2.
I do have a working guile-2.9.1/LilyPond-setup and results for
real-world ly-files are usually not that dramatically, but still big.
Otoh, I observe a steady improvement from 2.0.14 to 2.2.4 and the most
recent 2.9.1
So I'm eager to see how the final 3.0 will work.
Thanks,
Harm
