Re: 64-bit vs 32-bit LilyPond (GNU/Linux)

[SoundsFromSound]

Jay Anderson wrote
> On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 8:55 PM, SoundsFromSound
> <

> soundsfromsound@

> > wrote:
>> Wow, really? I never thought editing text files (.ly) would ever get
>> close
>> to 4GB of RAM. Maybe I'll try a quick benchmark here...
> 
> 6.9GB for one book to be exact. Text editing has nothing to do with it
> though. This is the amount of memory used to compile the project. This
> specific book is a much larger than most for sure (633 pages (9x12) of
> piano + horn music). I doubt most people would notice a difference
> between 32-bit and 64-bit installs.
> 
> -----Jay
> 
> _______________________________________________
> lilypond-user mailing list

> lilypond-user@

> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Now I see what you're getting at. So, assuming a user never
compiles/renders/outputs their score, just merely does the inputting, their
process is not going to increase RAM usage practically at all, right? It's
the compiling where LilyPond eats up resources in large projects?



-----
composer | sound designer 
LilyPond Tutorials (for beginners) --> http://bit.ly/bcl-lilypond
--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/64-bit-vs-32-bit-LilyPond-GNU-Linux-tp156754p156771.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.