On 2012/12/22 06:41:06, mike7 wrote:
On 21 déc. 2012, at 10:09, mailto:d...@gnu.org wrote:
> On 2012/12/21 07:59:02, MikeSol wrote: >> Hey all, > >> I'm ok w/ this on the countdown but can someone check out David's > suspicion that >> this slows stuff down by O(n^3)? I definitely won't push this if
it
> slows >> LilyPond down to a crawl. > > I am not ok with that. It looks really, really, really expensive.
I
> don't see what would be wrong with just setting a context property
flag
> axis-group-active in the engraver and refuse to maintain an axis
group
> if the flag is already set.
In general, elements should never recursively be elements of
themselves. Either grobs being elements of other grobs are a frequent occurence, in which case going through _all_ elements recursively each time in that particularly expensive way of unpacking them into a throw-away array is really wasteful, or they aren't, in which case we should just bother with those cases which actually act as grob containers. If we are talking about a general recursion-blocking mechanism, there are much, much, much, much more efficient ways than going recursively through the whole data base in an inefficient way (allocating and throwing away arrays temporarily on the heap) for every new element. https://codereview.appspot.com/6943072/ _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
