From: "G. de Montmollin" <gautier.demontmollin@maths.unine.ch>
Subject: Re: WinNT ADA compilers comparison
Date: 2000/07/25
Date: 2000-07-25T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <397DC549.250331FF@maths.unine.ch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 397C03F9.AF6DF60F@cadwin.com
Nicolas Brunot wrote:
> If you are concerned by executable size for example, even with optimization and
> strip, for example, we get gnat executable size incredibly huge in comparison
> even with old ADA83 compiler (40 Mo instead of 8 Mo !!!)
Strange - it ressembles to the GNAT / Alsys ratio on large projects...
But: did you apply the -gnatp option ?
The mass of code generated by GNAT (an generally by GCC), even with
effective optimisations, stripping etc., still intrigues me.
Of course, basically GCC was surely developed in a protected world
with Unix stations having "unlimited" storage, and without commercial
worries, but does anyone know what is all that stuffing ?...
______________________________________________________
Gautier -- http://members.xoom.com/gdemont/gsoft.htm
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2000-07-25 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2000-07-20 0:00 WinNT ADA compilers comparison Nicolas Brunot
2000-07-20 0:00 ` tmoran
2000-07-20 0:00 ` Stephen Leake
2000-07-20 0:00 ` Pascal Obry
2000-07-20 0:00 ` Thierry Lelegard
2000-07-20 0:00 ` Lionel Draghi
2000-07-21 0:00 ` Nicolas Brunot
2000-07-22 0:00 ` Thierry Lelegard
2000-07-24 0:00 ` Nicolas Brunot
2000-07-25 0:00 ` G. de Montmollin [this message]
2000-08-02 0:00 ` n_brunot
2000-07-26 0:00 ` Laurent Guerby
2000-08-02 0:00 ` n_brunot
2000-08-02 0:00 ` gdemont
2000-08-03 0:00 ` n_brunot
2000-08-03 0:00 ` Brian Rogoff
2000-08-03 0:00 ` tmoran
2000-08-04 0:00 ` Robert A Duff
2000-08-15 4:56 ` Robert I. Eachus
2000-08-16 0:00 ` n_brunot
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox