Re: How to make GNU Guile more successful

[Thomas Morley]

2017-03-05 15:09 GMT+01:00 David Kastrup <address@hidden>:
> Thomas Morley <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Here some timing values
>>
>> (1)
>> lilypond-2.19.52 using guile 1.8.7
>> (I would have prefered to build lilypond with a guile-1.8.8 build from
>> the guile-repository. Though my try to build it from the
>> branch_release-1-8 failed. Instead attempting to fix it, I then used a
>> released lilypond-version)
>>
>> real    8m16.191s
>> user    6m39.864s
>> sys    0m10.860s
>>
>> (2)
>> guile-2.0.14 build from guile-git-repository, branch 
>> remotes/origin/stable-2.0
>> lilypond-2.19.56, build from local branch dev/guile-v2.2-work
>>
>> real    34m11.762s
>> user    45m11.316s
>> sys    0m5.604s
>>
>> (3)
>> guile-2.1.7 build from guile-git-repository, branch master
>> (I've got this warning:
>> configure: WARNING: *** GNU Readline is too old on your system.
>> configure: WARNING: *** You need readline version 2.1 or later.
>> No idea whether this may have an impact on lilyponds compiling-time
>> I'll have to test.)
>> lilypond-2.19.56, build from local branch dev/guile-v2.2-work
>>
>> real    67m29.132s
>> user    93m14.812s
>> sys    0m7.332s
>
> Same compilation options?

Yep.
To get comparable results I always did exactly the same, for building
the guile-versions as well as for building lilypond.
Doing all tests with a fresh restarted computer.


Cheers,
  Harm

> This looks like a surprisingly serious
> regression compared to 2.0.
>
> --
> David Kastrup