Jean Abou Samra <j...@abou-samra.fr> writes: > Le dimanche 09 juillet 2023 à 12:39 +0200, David Kastrup a écrit : >> The build isn't broken unless you use bytecode compilation. Do we do >> this in general? > > > Depends on who is "we". I for one always build with bytecode because LilyPond > is > quite slow without it, especially the startup. > >> Do we have a way of installing bytecode? > > See "make install-bytecode". (Bytecode is shipped in the lilypond.org > binaries.)
Ugh. Looks like our test pipeline setup would warrant including testing about this, then. Sorry, I had not followed this development, or obviously it would have been proper to test this with a patch like that. I do not consider this a great fix: I implemented a workaround for negation after all instead of just removing it from operator support, with the consequence of "supporting" decidedly weird forms of subtraction that can hopefully get removed again at some point of time. This is really experimental, and the scope may still change depending on experiences. -- David Kastrup
