Re: Guile optimizations slowing down the program?

[Jean Abou Samra <jean@abou-samra.fr>]

> Le 9 mars 2022 à 08:53, "Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide" <arne_bab@web.de> a écrit :
> 
> 
> Maxime Devos <maximedevos@telenet.be> writes:
>> Jean Abou Samra schreef op wo 09-03-2022 om 00:31 [+0100]:
>>> In summary, the less Guile optimizes, the faster LilyPond runs. Is that
>>> something expected?
>> 
>> I don't think so, but I don't have a clue how this happens ...
> 
> Do I understand it correctly that Lilypond has lots of snippets that are
> executed exactly once? In that case it could be expected that the
> overhead of optimization dominates — maybe even the overhead of
> increased code-size from inlining?


What is byte-compiled in these experiments is not the code from .ly files (which is always evaluated via primitive-eval and not compiled), but the code from LilyPond's .scm files. The compilation is done ahead of time, so its overhead can't be responsible for these results.


> Also the new baseline compiler is already pretty good:
> https://wingolog.org/archives/2020/06/03/a-baseline-compiler-for-guile



> Maybe this?
> 
>> 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.

Thanks for responding!

Jean


> 
> Best wishes,
> Arne
> -- 
> Unpolitisch sein
> heißt politisch sein,
> ohne es zu merken.
> draketo.de