[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: On being web-friendly and why info must die

From: Achim Gratz
Subject: Re: On being web-friendly and why info must die
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2014 19:51:45 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux)

David Engster writes:
>  > time emacs --batch -Q orgmanual.org --eval "(with-current-buffer 
> \"orgmanual.org\" (org-export-to-file (quote html) \"orgmanual.html\"))"
>  emacs --batch -Q orgmanual.org --eval   117.49s user 0.12s system 100% cpu 
> 1:57.56 total
> That's almost TWO MINUTES just for exporting one manual, and not even a
> particularly big one. And that's on a Core i7.

Told you so.  But the discussion at the moment is whether Org would be a
suitable format, not whether the export is slow.

> For me, Texinfo 5.2 is on average roughly 15 times slower than Texinfo 4
> (for generating HTML). And people already say THAT is too slow. And Org
> is about 167 times slower than Texinfo 4, at least for the Org manual (I
> haven't looked, but I'd be willing to bet that this does not scale
> linearly, so things are probably much worse for behemoths like the Calc
> manual).

I've looked at the complexity together with Nicolas and yes it is known
to be at least quadratic in the number of (sub-)sections.  Some of that
could be avoided, but at the moment the focus in developing the
org-element code is on correctness.  The Cals manual is roughly twice as
big (in bytes), I haven't looked at the sectioning, though.

+<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]>+

Factory and User Sound Singles for Waldorf rackAttack:

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]