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: 103376,3e02c4f038f9f7ae,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Shrinking GNAT OS/2 Executables
Date: 1996/04/05
Message-ID: <dewar.828761149@schonberg>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 146054127
references: <4k4l26$1bs2@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>
organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-04-05T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Anthony said:

"Recently, I tried out a new freeware EXE and DLL file compression utility
LxLite version 1.01 that I downloaded from http://www.os2.hammer.org/OS2.
The results with both GNAT EXE and DLL files has been very excellent. GNAT
EXE and DLL files compress very well. Using the utility, I've seen 250 KB
executables shrink down to 45 KB. Even the GNAT compiler itself shrinks
from more than 2 MB to just over 1 MB in size. Not only does this save a
lot of disk space, but executables load much faster with much less disk I/O.
I've even compressed all the distributed EMX EXE and DLL files with similar
success. I highy recommend the utility to other GNAT users, and suggest that
future GNAT executables also be distributed in compressed form.
"

I do not see that this can have much impact on performance if you are
using emxload, and the performance difference of using or not using
emxload is so dramatic, that my advice is don't eveb consider using
GNAT on OS/2 without it if you can afford the memory. So the critical
question is: is lxLite compatible with emxload.

(I am talking here of performance of the compiler itself)