Tim Roberts <t...@probo.com> writes: > George_ wrote: >> WRT (1): Someone in this thread suggested using individual threads to render >> a bar at a time. The end result would be messy, but what if one or two >> threads were dedicated to running 'behind' the main threads to clean up and >> knit together output? > > Multithreading works well when there are "natural" subdivisions of the > work. It's really hard to come up with a "natural" subdivision for > Lilypond. Bars are not particularly fundamental to Lilypond music. Bar > lines are just another thing that get engraved. Plus, Lilypond does not > require that all staves in a system have the same bar structure. > Dividing into systems would be convenient, but you don't really know > where the next system starts until you're done with the current one.
Uh, no? AFAIK, LilyPond uses linear programming, and that requires combing through a currently active set of optima and generating the next set. That is at its heart a parallel operation. > Having done quite a lot of threaded programming, when I think of the > job Lilypond is doing, I don't see any natural breakdown. It's a very > sequential process. Hm. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
