Hi Graham, Thanks for the quick response. Few more comments inline, below.
Trevor. On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 12:59 PM, Graham Percival <gra...@percival-music.ca>wrote: > On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 5:12 PM, Trevor Bača <trevorb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.12/Documentation/user/lilypond-learning/Avoiding-tweaks-with-slower-processing > > > > ... the language in the LM is somewhat ambiguous as to whether > > keep-inside-line settings speed things up or slow things down. > > > > QUESTION: I have to assume that keep-inside-line is relatively expensive > and > > that the recommendation in the LM is to *NOT* use the keep-inside-line > > settings, yes? > > keep-inside-line is expensive. The recommendation is to leave it off > (the default) for faster processing. However, I personally recommend > to turn it on when creating the final version, so that you don't need > to manually add \break commands to avoid text running off the > right-hand side of the page. > Very good. Thanks for the clarification. > > James, please prepare a patch to clarify this issue. > > > > Next, there is a thread here ... > > > > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2009-08/msg00057.html > > I repeat my previous statement: > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2009-08/msg00111.html > > I'd add some swear-words for emphasis if I thought that would help. > > > > I guess the reason I'm writing in to ask the question is that I feel that > > something has changed for the worse since the early versions of Lily I > used > > on the score in 2005 > > Since then, we've had > - skyline vertical placement (you don't need to manually increase the > padding on text scripts!) > - better vertical placement of systems on a page (maybe not > particularly relevant to huge scores when you can only fit one system > per page anyway) > > Both of those are expensive. > Ah, good point, on both counts. The score in question contains no scripts. Hmm ... isn't there a way to turn off skyline vertical placement? > > > (As a postscript, I also have #(define page-breaking ly:minimal-breaking) > > set in the score because I set all breaks and vertical spacing by hand. I > > know that certain changes that Joe's made to dramatically improve > vertical > > spacing cane be time consumptive in some cases, so maybe this is a > > precaution to ward against that. However, the setting produces no obvious > > increase in performance, which makes me think that vertical spacing has > > nothing to do with the performance difference I'm experiencing.) > > Hmm. 1) are you sure that minimal-breaking is the lowest-CPU option? > Isn't there a naive-breaking, or even a non-automatic-breaking ? If > you've manually set *all* breaks and pageBreaks, then theoretically > that would save a **ton** of CPU resources. > Actually, you're right: I'm not certain. I was assuming that minimal would be the least CPU-intensive option, but I may be wrong. (I've added Joe to the thread in the hopes that he might weigh in.) > 2) are you certain that you've defined this in the right place? I'm > not suggesting that *I* know the right place, but I'm not certain if > you're supposed to add this to the top of your file, or inside the > first \book{} block, or put it in every \score block, or what. I've currently got the minimal page-breaking setting defined in the top-level \paper-block in the file (which is also the only \paper-block in the file). I'm 82.63% certain that that's the correct place. Trevor. -- Trevor Bača trevorb...@gmail.com
_______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
