dak at gnu.org
Mon Apr 2 19:27:05 CEST 2007
Taco Hoekwater <taco at elvenkind.com> writes:
> David Kastrup wrote:
>> Some of it might be the difference in table sizes for the plain TeX
>> executable. But the factor of 25 seems to fit rather well also with
>> the LaTeX format test. Any idea where the bulk of this would be from?
>> What would somebody wanting to use LuaTeX in a production environment
>> do (apart from getting his head examined, I mean)?
> Luatex is slower than normal tex, and I expect the values for dumping
> latex are about right.Dumping any format is quite a bit slower,
> because the format is a) bigger, b) more complex, and c) compressed.
> What is wrong with that tex.tex file is a mystery. I have not seen
> such slowness here and do not (yet) comprehend what is going on. Is
> there any particular part where it hesitates, or is it just overall
> much slower?
No, just going slowly overall the way it looks, so it can't be
kpathsea, I guess. The file is just generated by
and then compiled either with
or with (after luatex -ini plain.tex "\dump")
luatex "&plain" tex
I should probably repeat the test with pdfTeX rather than TeX, but I
have my doubts that it will account for _such_ a difference. In
particular when it is running in DVI mode.
I have not yet looked at the optimization options with which LuaTeX
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
More information about the dev-luatex