lily rO><Or!

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

lily rO><Or!

Nicolas Sceaux
Hi,

I've just converted an old score from lily 1.6 to 2.7.
This 180 page score is built with a single lilypond invocation.
On my laptop (1.5GHz G4, 512 Mo):

robert$ wc -l *ly */*ly
     ...
   27436 total
robert$ time lilypond score.ly > score.log 2>&1

real    12m52.841s
user    10m43.889s
sys     0m23.546s

Wahou. This used to be around 40 minutes, in an slightly older
computer, with multiple lilypond invocations.

Lily is getting so cool. Kuddos to Han-Wen and Jan!

nicolas


_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lily rO><Or!

Jan Nieuwenhuizen
Nicolas Sceaux writes:

> real    12m52.841s
>
> Wahou. This used to be around 40 minutes, in an slightly older
> computer, with multiple lilypond invocations.

Woe, 1ee7.  To be fair, it should be compared to 1.6 on your current
hardware.  Esp. with large scores, as soon as the lilypond process
does not fit in memory anymore it will start thrashing, which will
dramatically increase the processing time.

> Lily is getting so cool. Kuddos to Han-Wen and Jan!

But thanks anyway!

Jan.

--
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[hidden email]> | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter
http://www.xs4all.nl/~jantien       | http://www.lilypond.org


_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lily rO><Or!

Han-Wen Nienhuys
In reply to this post by Nicolas Sceaux
Nicolas Sceaux wrote:
> Wahou. This used to be around 40 minutes, in an slightly older
> computer, with multiple lilypond invocations.
>
> Lily is getting so cool. Kuddos to Han-Wen and Jan!

Thanks!

the downside to this is that there is little left to optimize, I still
think Lily is a bit slow, but with painstaking optimization, I've only
been been able to get some 10 to 30 % during the 2.7 cycle.


--
  Han-Wen Nienhuys - [hidden email] - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen


_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lily rO><Or!

Maurits Lamers-2
In reply to this post by Nicolas Sceaux
I was wondering...

if you cannot optimize the code itself very much. maybe it is possible
to improve the way Lilypond parses the ly file.

When I am editing and tweaking a file, I need to change one little
thing and recompile it.
As far as I can see it, lilypond then always runs the complete file
from scratch...

Maybe it is possible to provide lilypond with a kind of diff function
that enables it to determine the changes and change only what is
necessary ?
(by saving states for example...) Or is this impossible ?

If this could work it could mean quite a speed improvement...

greets

Maurits

On 24-aug-05, at 22:00, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:

> Nicolas Sceaux wrote:
>> Wahou. This used to be around 40 minutes, in an slightly older
>> computer, with multiple lilypond invocations.
>> Lily is getting so cool. Kuddos to Han-Wen and Jan!
>
> Thanks!
>
> the downside to this is that there is little left to optimize, I still
> think Lily is a bit slow, but with painstaking optimization, I've only
> been been able to get some 10 to 30 % during the 2.7 cycle.
>
>
> --
>  Han-Wen Nienhuys - [hidden email] - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> lilypond-user mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user



_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user