From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,e9f27bbe0678fdfc
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Geoff Bull <geoff@research.canon.com.au>
Subject: Re: huge executable??
Date: 2000/05/16
Message-ID: <392091E9.20999FBE@research.canon.com.au>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 623843063
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <391E09C3.FA04871E@mailandnews.com>
 <9EET4.760$pN4.423580@news.pacbell.net> <3920DA5B.2F56@club-internet.fr>
 <8fpu0g$a3e$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <slrn8i10hn.4ua.lutz@taranis.iks-jena.de>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Complaints-To: usenet@research.canon.com.au
X-Trace: cass.research.canon.com.au 958435775 6578 203.12.174.227 (16 May 2000
 00:09:35 GMT)
Organization: Canon Information Systems Research Australia
Mime-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 May 2000 00:09:35 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 2000-05-16T00:09:35+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Lutz Donnerhacke wrote:
> 
> * Robert Dewar wrote:

> >Basically the issue here boils down to disk costs alone. Seeing
> >as 128K bytes is approximately $0.004 worth of disk space, I
> >don't see this as a big worry these days :-)
> 
> I'm developing for Systems with 8 MB RAM and 64 kb RAM.

So?