Mike Solomon <m...@mikesolomon.org> writes: > On Dec 10, 2013, at 10:36 AM, Keith OHara <k-ohara5...@oco.net> wrote: > >> On Mon, 25 Nov 2013 00:10:08 -0800, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: >> >>> "Keith OHara" <k-ohara5...@oco.net> writes: >>> >>>> I timed one big score, Movement 1 of >>>> <http://www.mutopiaproject.org/cgibin/piece-info.cgi?id=1793> >>>> 2.16.2 2.17.95 >>>> WinXP 2m 30s 5m 10s >>>> Fedora 1m 50s 1m 50s >> >>> Have you used the GUB-compiled binary package, or Fedora's built-in or a >>> self-compiled package? I think that you probably can only make >>> platform-specific comparisons if you use GUB for all. >> >> GUB-compiled packages in all cases give the same results as above. >> >> Most of the increase in time to set this score happened between 2.17.0 and .1 >> 2.16.2 2m 30s >> 2.17.0 2m 28s >> 2.17.1 4m 06s >> so it is probably the issue 2148 patch, use of outlines instead of >> boxes for layout. >> >> I did speed-test that patch, but under Linux. Maybe the system >> calls to the font server, to get outlines for the glyphs, take >> longer under Windows. > > One easy way to avoid this is to turn off this feature with > vertical-skylines = ##f for lots of grobs - I do this often for big > scores when I want to compile them fast, but I reactivate the more > accurate vertical skylines for the final version.
Sigh. It's stuff like that which really makes me pessimistic about the prospects of LilyPond as serious software. If its developers consider it unusable for serious work out of the box without making use of their personal, secret bag of tricks, how are we supposed to tell people with a straight face that this software is useful other than as either a toy or a tinker box? -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
