cvs.gedasymbols.org/archives/browse.cgi | search |
From: | Jason Green <news AT jgreen4 DOT fsnet DOT co DOT uk> |
Newsgroups: | comp.os.msdos.djgpp |
Subject: | Re: Sizes of executables |
Date: | Sun, 13 Feb 2000 16:48:25 +0000 |
Organization: | Customer of Planet Online |
Lines: | 15 |
Message-ID: | <0u3daskpfv3qmis4m93sa1035r9lh7ni2l@4ax.com> |
References: | <r3a6assbjgn7jvmc710ups09utouuk5gqj AT 4ax DOT com> <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1000213092812 DOT 29873E-100000 AT is> |
NNTP-Posting-Host: | modem-163.fluorine.dialup.pol.co.uk |
Mime-Version: | 1.0 |
X-Trace: | news7.svr.pol.co.uk 950460973 11232 62.136.8.163 (13 Feb 2000 16:56:13 GMT) |
NNTP-Posting-Date: | 13 Feb 2000 16:56:13 GMT |
X-Complaints-To: | abuse AT theplanet DOT net |
X-Newsreader: | Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 |
To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
DJ-Gateway: | from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp |
Reply-To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> wrote: > > I don't know why the FAQ does not suggest -Os > > Because I think it's not very wise (to say the least) to trade > run-time speed for some KBytes on disk. Hmm, maybe you are right that in the context of the FAQ the correct advice is to use -O2. (For desktop applications this is best). The reason I asked about -Os was because I thought there might be other objections to using it apart from the performance trade-off. If this is not the case then it could be bad advice to say that -O2 gives the smallest code without knowing the user's application.
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |