This is the mail archive of the
gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [Fwd: RE: Executable size]
What a bummer. As I need the STL and I need some of the functionality
of 3.2, I guess I will have to live with the code increase. The bummer
is that the code increase comes with no performance increase (which is
good if you look at it from the other side [larger executable with no
run time penalty]).
Thank you all for your replys.
Chris
On Wed, 2002-09-25 at 11:50, bjorn rohde jensen wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> These sizes, you are reporting, are they the size
> of the binary, or did you use the command 'size'?
> There can be quite a difference between the size
> of a binary file and the running program.
> If you are conserned about the size of your C++
> programs due to STL libraries, you really ought
> to link with the shared library instead of the
> static one. It will help reduce the cost a bit,
> but the template instantiations you can not avoid:)
>
> Yours sincerely,
>
> Bjorn