https://codereview.appspot.com/547980044/diff/567490043/lily/include/skyline.hh File lily/include/skyline.hh (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/547980044/diff/567490043/lily/include/skyline.hh#newcode152 lily/include/skyline.hh:152: } On 2020/04/24 16:33:04, hahnjo wrote: > Why do you need all of this in the header file? As far as I can see, nobody else > is calling these methods, so the argument of inlinining does not apply. trimmed this a bit. https://codereview.appspot.com/547980044/diff/567490043/lily/skyline-pair.cc File lily/skyline-pair.cc (left): https://codereview.appspot.com/547980044/diff/567490043/lily/skyline-pair.cc#oldcode100 lily/skyline-pair.cc:100: Skyline_pair::print_points () const On 2020/04/24 16:33:04, hahnjo wrote: > You should not delete a function without removing the declaration in > lily/include/skyline-pair.hh. Also this seems unrelated to the performance > improvements. the print() function prints the building in terms of y-intercept at x=0.0 + slope. Since we don't store the y-intercept anymore, that is useless now. The points are also more convenient for debugging, which is the only objective of this function. https://codereview.appspot.com/547980044/diff/567490043/lily/skyline.cc File lily/skyline.cc (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/547980044/diff/567490043/lily/skyline.cc#newcode780 lily/skyline.cc:780: Skyline::to_segments (Axis horizon_axis) const On 2020/04/24 16:33:04, hahnjo wrote: > What's the advantage of this code over the old method? the buildings making up the skylines have become non-contiguous, so you can't simply connect all the points any more. (If you'd do that, there would be diagonal line segments printed in debug output that aren't really there.) https://codereview.appspot.com/547980044/diff/567490043/scm/define-grobs.scm File scm/define-grobs.scm (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/547980044/diff/567490043/scm/define-grobs.scm#newcode1657 scm/define-grobs.scm:1657: (stencil . ,ly:paper-column::print) On 2020/04/24 16:33:04, hahnjo wrote: > Is this change intentional? And intentionally in this review? thanks, no. I was already wondering why the cell count shot up in the profile :-) https://codereview.appspot.com/547980044/
