Re: State of LilyPond with Guile 2.2

[Jonas Hahnfeld]

Thanks for testing!

Am Sonntag, dem 18.04.2021 um 22:16 +0200 schrieb Thomas Morley:
> Am So., 18. Apr. 2021 um 16:41 Uhr schrieb Thomas Morley
> <thomasmorley65@gmail.com>:
> > Currently I'm testing both. From a user's and a developer's point of view.
> > I'll post about it in the (late) evening or tomorrow.
> > Please have a little patience.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> >   Harm
> 
> Ok, here my experiences:
> 
> ## Compiling .scm-files lasts a multiple of the former mentioned 2
> minutes on my weak laptop, no surprise, though I thought I should
> mention it.
> ## I noticed a plethora of messages like:
> warning: possibly unbound variable `symbol-list-or-symbol?'
> ...

Yes, this warning is very annoying. IIRC you even get some when
compiling Guile itself...


> Well, now to the lesser important ones.
> ## Error-handling:
> consider the typo in
> {
>   \override NoteHead.after-line-breaking =
>   #(lambda (grob) (ly:grob-set-property! grob 'stencil poit-stencil))
>   b1
> }
> with guile-1 one gets:
> 
> While evaluating arguments to ly:grob-set-property! in expression
> (ly:grob-set-property! grob (quote stencil) ...):
> atest-106.ly:1064:5: Unbound variable: poit-stencil
> 
> with guile-2.2:
> 
> Backtrace:
> [...]
> 
> ERROR: In procedure %resolve-variable:
> Unbound variable: poit-stencil
> 
> A little too heavy...Can this be reduced?

So you mean without the backtrace?


> Some observations:
> (1)
> The whole cycle worked fine, no errors apart from my own.
> Though, regtest-comparision shows:
> WARNING: (lily song): imported module (lily song-util) overrides core
> binding `compose'
> For input/regression/song-melisma.log and others.
> Which is new with guile-2.
> No clue how to avoid this other then not to use taken identifiers.

Yes, this needs some love, though I'm not sure I full get David's
answer.

> (2)
> If I switch to a different branch, with changed .scm-files, do some
> work there and then switch back (NB in this branch the scm-files are
> _not_ changed inbetween) I need to recompile guile, a real nuisance.
> Could this be improved?

I'm not sure I understand this: Do you mean the .scm files from Guile
itself, or the .scm files from LilyPond? If the latter, do you mean
"recompile" with GUILE_AUTO_COMPILE=1?


> I'd love to redo testings with guile-3, alas, while `make' succeeds,
> GUILE_AUTO_COMPILE=1 failed. I didn't investigate further, though.

Could again be some changes with guile-3 complaining about LilyPond
playing tricks...

Jonas

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part