From: "Tony Picarello" <primate@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Executable File Size Differences
Date: 1996/09/28
Date: 1996-09-28T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <01bbad5c$f6121fc0$90ea93cf@darkstar.bitsurfer.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: dewar.843920181@schonberg
I too compiled the simple "Hello World" program using ObjectAda. The exe
size "Win32 (Intel) Debug" version was 715K. The exe "Win32 (Intel)
Release" version was 82.5K.
For obvious reasons, building a Debug version brings a lot of extra stuff
into the exe. Just be sure that your final build is a Release version. I
think this answers the question of the why the ObjectAda exe is several
hundred Kilobytes larger than the C++ exe.
Regards,
Tony
Robert Dewar <dewar@schonberg.cs.nyu.edu> wrote in article
<dewar.843920181@schonberg>...
> Robert said
>
> "I tried compiling a simple "Hello World" program with the Thomson
Software's Act
> ivAda for Windows
> and Thomson's new "ObjectAda". The ActivAda version produces a executable
file s
> ize of about 288K.
> ObjectAda produces an exe of about 788K. Microsoft C++ produces an exe of
about
> 10K. Why are the
> executables so substantially different? Are the Ada compilers linking in
alot of
> excess baggage? I
> have tried various compiler switches, but nothing seems to shrink the exe
file s
> izes.
>
> Can anyone enlighten me here?"
>
> (P.S. please keep your posts to 80 characters, really makes life easier!)
>
> The GNAT executable under OS/2 is 57K, which is smaller but still larger
> than the 10K you see from C. There are two reasons for this. First, it is
> likely that the C is linking against a dynamically shared library which
> is taking up room, but does not show up in the 10K. Second, GANT is
> indeed dragging in quite a bit, including full exception support, full
> support for controlled types, full support for tagged types. In a small
> program this makes for some extra size, but of course this is a fixed
size
> increment, if you make a larger program, it does not get proportionally
> bigger.
>
> For example, I just wrote a complete preprocessor program for GNAT (toi
be
> included in some future release!) that provides conditional compilation
> capability, and symbol substitution capability, including nested
> conditoinals, with quite a bit of flexibility. This program also uses
> Text_IO, but the executable is only 81K. It is a 1000 line program
> with 534 non-blank non-comment lines, so it is about 100 times the length
> of hello world in source lines, but certainly not 100 times the length
> in the executable!
>
> I would guess that you would see the same phenomenon with ObjectAda, i.e.
> that there is a fair amount of fixed overhead, but it does not go up
> with the size of the source file in linear proportion.
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1996-09-28 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1996-09-28 0:00 Executable File Size Differences Robert Dewar
1996-09-28 0:00 ` Tony Picarello [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
1996-09-29 0:00 tmoran
1996-09-29 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1996-09-25 0:00 Robert P. Kuzmicki
1996-09-25 0:00 ` Georgi Savov
1996-09-28 0:00 ` Stanley Allen
1996-09-28 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1996-09-30 0:00 ` Richard A. O'Keefe
1996-10-01 0:00 ` Ken Cowan
1996-10-03 0:00 ` Stanley Allen
1996-10-02 0:00 ` Robert I. Eachus
1996-10-06 0:00 ` John Howard
1996-09-28 0:00 ` Simon FitzMaurice
1996-10-02 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
1996-10-11 0:00 ` Robert I. Eachus
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox