Re: [final PATCH] Re: not-so-ancient flags

[Han-Wen Nienhuys]

Looks good to me.

+     (flag ,procedure? "A function returning the full flag stencil for

this should be ,stencil? - as you can see, there are plenty of
properties that have procedure values, but aren't defined as such.

+;; Add the stroke to the flag: Load the correct glyph from the font and add it
+(define-public (add-stroke-glyph stencil stem-grob dir stroke-style flag-style)

If possible, use doc strings rather than comments.


On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 7:29 PM, Reinhold Kainhofer
<address@hidden> wrote:

> [*] We now have two ways to generate flags: One C++ implementation
> (ly:stem::calc-flag) and one pure-Scheme implementation (default-flag).
> Both require the same amount of memory and there is hardly any difference
> in their runtime. For example, a file consisting of 10,000 eighth notes
> (nothing else) needs ~1.5GB RAM and runs for a bit over 3 minutes here,
> with the C++ implementation beating the Scheme implementation by mere
> 5 seconds:
> In C++:
>    real    3m9.133s
>    user    3m4.896s
>
> In Scheme:
>    real    3m14.016s
>    user    3m10.024s

That's 5 seconds on 180secs - 2%.  I find that a lot for just a single property.

> Okay to push to master?

Yes.

> PS: What about the straight flags glyphs that we already designed? Should we
> simply drop that and do a pure Scheme implementation with all its drawbacks
> (no proper hinting, as pointed out by Werner in Bug #652)?
> Werner, should the get_subpath function still be moved from parmesan-macros.mf
> to feta-macros.mf, even though it is not really required there?

I'm for dropping the MF flags.

-- 
Han-Wen Nienhuys - address@hidden - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen