I think I have to take back the claim that typing is not slow, when the
macros are not defined. Apparently, I tested it in the wrong equation.
In the first equation of appendix C, typing is still dead slow, even
with undefined macros. So probably it's not the fault of your macros!
Sorry for all th
> Is it really slower at the document end than at the beginning? Cannot
> see a big difference here.
In principle I thought that there is such a relation, because in the
first equation of the document, there is no dilatation at all, while at
later parts there is. BUT: I just figured out, that ty
Is it really slower at the document end than at the beginning? Cannot
see a big difference here.
Stefan
Am 18.11.2007 um 15:35 schrieb sebastian guttenberg:
Let's see. There is a hope that the 20% figure was not so precise and
it's more in fact ;-)
I just figured out that typing at the end
> Let's see. There is a hope that the 20% figure was not so precise and
> it's more in fact ;-)
I just figured out that typing at the end of the document is not slow
when I do not define the math-macros at the beginning.
-sebastian
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous c
Am 18.11.2007 um 14:02 schrieb sebastian guttenberg:
The macro part takes 20% of the runtime, when writing math at the
document end. I already have ideas how to reduce that. Otherwise
there
are a lot of metrics and draw calls around taking much time. Not sure
if that is related to macros at
> The macro part takes 20% of the runtime, when writing math at the
> document end. I already have ideas how to reduce that. Otherwise there
> are a lot of metrics and draw calls around taking much time. Not sure
> if that is related to macros at all.
Aha. Thanks a lot for the info!
That mea
The macro part takes 20% of the runtime, when writing math at the
document end. I already have ideas how to reduce that. Otherwise there
are a lot of metrics and draw calls around taking much time. Not sure
if that is related to macros at all.
Stefan
Am 16.11.2007 um 13:53 schrieb sebastia
On Fri, Nov 16, 2007 at 03:19:13PM +0200, sebastian guttenberg wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-11-16 at 14:05 +0100, Stefan Schimanski wrote:
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Looks like a perfect document for some profiling to find the
> > bottlenecks.
> >
> > Indeed it's quite slow at the end. Will run a profiler to
Am 16.11.2007 um 10:36 schrieb sebastian guttenberg:
Hello
When I open one of my longer documents in lyx 1.6.0svn and want to
edit
an equation, typing takes me about 1 second per character!! Outside
equations its fine, and in a shorter document it's also fine.
This was definitely not the cas
> Complained that it was too big. I guess it's fine now, as Stefan has a
> copy, but for the future it would be good to know, what to do with big
> example files for the mailing list...
you can put them in wiki or bugzilla and give only url.
pavel
On Fri, 2007-11-16 at 14:05 +0100, Stefan Schimanski wrote:
> Thanks!
>
> Looks like a perfect document for some profiling to find the
> bottlenecks.
>
> Indeed it's quite slow at the end. Will run a profiler tonight. Then
> we should know.
>
> Stefan
Thanks Stefan for taking care!
By the w
Thanks!
Looks like a perfect document for some profiling to find the
bottlenecks.
Indeed it's quite slow at the end. Will run a profiler tonight. Then
we should know.
Stefan
Am 16.11.2007 um 13:53 schrieb sebastian guttenberg:
Hi Stefan!
Here it is. (It was also the file, where I had t
sebastian guttenberg wrote:
Hello
When I open one of my longer documents in lyx 1.6.0svn and want to edit
an equation, typing takes me about 1 second per character!! Outside
equations its fine, and in a shorter document it's also fine.
This was definitely not the case in lyx 1.4.3.
I have thought
13 matches
Mail list logo
