[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Problem with guile-2.9.1-prerelease
From: |
Thomas Morley |
Subject: |
Re: Problem with guile-2.9.1-prerelease |
Date: |
Sun, 14 Oct 2018 11:22:31 +0200 |
Am Fr., 12. Okt. 2018 um 01:45 Uhr schrieb Thomas Morley
<address@hidden>:
> Tomorrow I'll redo a full 'make doc'.
> Testing your changes with guile-2.2.4 and guile-1.8 is postponed for
> tomorrow as well.
To facilitate testing I had to change my local setup to compare
multiple combinations of guile-versions with lilypond.
Sorry for the delay, compiling guile-versions is very time-consuming...
So, here my setup, in the end I tested with 5 lilypond-versions:
(1)
LilyPond 2.19.82 from the installer, i.e. with guile-1.8
Below 4 selfcompiled versions out of
commit ea638182bcc87414c7f186d40f376bbbf560f5d1
Author: David Kastrup <address@hidden>
Date: Wed Oct 3 14:20:45 2018 +0200
Issue 5423: First separator for subassignments must be '.'
This pares down syntax supported since issue 4790 to match the allowed
usage from issue 4797. Permitting ',' here seemed particularly
strange.
(2)
LilyPond 2.21.0 with guile-1.8.8
(3)
LilyPond 2.21.0 with guile-2.0.14
(4)
LilyPond 2.21.0 with guile-2.2.4
(5)
LilyPond 2.21.0 with guile-2.9.1
(3) to (5) have the attached patches applied to make them work with guilev2
on top of (2) - (5) David's patch from this thread:
Use different `values' implementation of Guilev2
is applied. It is in the attached archive as well.
Results:
David, your patch always works and does as desired.
How about putting it up for review?
Karlin et all, here some performance-values (always taken from a
second of two runs) with
$ time <lilypond-command> <file.ly>
>From a file with close to no user-generated guile-code
(resulting in a 40-pages-pdf)
ad (1)
real 1m19,297s
user 1m16,390s
sys 0m1,883s
ad (2)
real 1m10,707s
user 1m9,220s
sys 0m1,336s
ad (3)
real 4m13,883s
user 5m7,904s
sys 0m1,474s
ad (4)
real 4m3,027s
user 5m10,502s
sys 0m1,697s
ad (5)
real 3m34,525s
user 4m34,974s
sys 0m1,613s
>From a file with huge amount of user generated guile-code
(resulting in a 8-pages-pdf)
(1)
real 0m24,107s
user 0m23,002s
sys 0m1,101s
(2)
real 0m21,689s
user 0m20,740s
sys 0m0,923s
(3)
real 1m20,443s
user 1m33,126s
sys 0m0,918s
(4)
real 0m45,537s
user 0m52,817s
sys 0m0,991s
(5)
real 0m40,445s
user 0m46,441s
sys 0m0,955s
So there _is_ some improvement, but all in all not overwhelming, imho.
Additionally, I've probably found a new small issue with guilev2, but
this is worth another thread.
As said above the used guilev2-patches are attached, if someone wants
to join testing.
Be aware some of them (especially my own ones) are more workarounds
than proper fixes.
Hints are always welcome.
Cheers,
Harm
patches-for-guile-2-9-1.zip
Description: Zip archive
- Re: Problem with guile-2.9.1-prerelease, (continued)
- Re: Problem with guile-2.9.1-prerelease, Thomas Morley, 2018/10/11
- Re: Problem with guile-2.9.1-prerelease, Karlin High, 2018/10/11
- Re: Problem with guile-2.9.1-prerelease, Thomas Morley, 2018/10/11
- Re: Problem with guile-2.9.1-prerelease, David Kastrup, 2018/10/11
- Re: Problem with guile-2.9.1-prerelease, Thomas Morley, 2018/10/11
- Re: Problem with guile-2.9.1-prerelease, David Kastrup, 2018/10/11
- Re: Problem with guile-2.9.1-prerelease, Thomas Morley, 2018/10/11
- Re: Problem with guile-2.9.1-prerelease, David Kastrup, 2018/10/11
- Re: Problem with guile-2.9.1-prerelease, Thomas Morley, 2018/10/11
- Re: Problem with guile-2.9.1-prerelease, David Kastrup, 2018/10/12
- Re: Problem with guile-2.9.1-prerelease,
Thomas Morley <=
- Re: Problem with guile-2.9.1-prerelease, Thomas Morley, 2018/10/14
- Re: Problem with guile-2.9.1-prerelease, Urs Liska, 2018/10/11
- Re: Problem with guile-2.9.1-prerelease, Carl Sorensen, 2018/10/11
- Re: Problem with guile-2.9.1-prerelease, David Kastrup, 2018/10/11
- Re: Problem with guile-2.9.1-prerelease, David Kastrup, 2018/10/11