[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Guile optimizations slowing down the program?
From: |
Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide |
Subject: |
Re: Guile optimizations slowing down the program? |
Date: |
Wed, 09 Mar 2022 11:25:07 +0100 |
User-agent: |
mu4e 1.6.10; emacs 27.2 |
Jean Abou Samra <jean@abou-samra.fr> writes:
>>> There is also a felicitous feedback effect in that because the
>>> baseline compiler is much smaller than the CPS compiler, it takes less
>>> time to macro-expand —
>>> https://wingolog.org/archives/2020/06/03/a-baseline-compiler-for-guile
>
> As far as I understand, this is about the speed of compilation. For
> the reason explained above, it doesn't factor into the speed of
> LilyPond.
The speed of compilation is only part of it. The blog post also shows
that the optimizations gain factor 4 in speed for the compiled code, but
if there are lots of macros to expand in the *.ly files, unoptimized
code (which is smaller, because it is higher-level) might actually be
faster.
This as all highly speculative on my side, though …
> Thanks for responding!
In my opinion Lilypond is one of the most important Guile-Programs.
Since I started running Guix as Distro, Lilypond is no longer *the* most
important Guile program for me (since without Guix my system would
simply not run), but Lilypond is still the one tool I really need.
All the other Guile-using utilities I have are nice to have conveniences
(or code I wrote myself). Lilypond is the only mission-critical tool for
which I would not be able to find a replacement, because I require it to
improve my songbook. There’s just nothing like it.
Thank you very much for working on Lilypond!
Best wishes,
Arne
--
Unpolitisch sein
heißt politisch sein,
ohne es zu merken.
draketo.de
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature