[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: --enable-final again
From:       Mario Weilguni <mweilguni () sime ! com>
Date:       1999-05-28 15:24:23
[Download RAW message or body]

Am Fri, 28 May 1999 schrieb Alex Zepeda:
>On Thu, 27 May 1999, Mario Weilguni wrote:
>
>> I did some testing with and without --enable-final, and I must say on Intel
>> machines it's definitly not worth the efforts:
>
>> Considering all the troubles you get from --enable-final (huge memory
>> usage, C++ vs C hassle, include file dependencies e.g. those stupid
>> X11 headers...) it's not worth 14 kb. I'm sure there are better ways
>> to reduce the memory footprint.
>
>Memory (RAM) useage is not in any way directly related to the size of the
>binary on disk.  Smaller binaries might just have poorer code.  The true
>test is when you run the binary.  Does it use less RAM, does it run
>faster? etc etc etc

I've did some testing with those flags on qt itself, compiled a minimal program
and linked with this special qt:
without special flags:
disk usage=4.2MB, mem usage (VMLIB) = 4.6MB

with special flags:
disk usage=3.03 MB, mem usage (VMLIB)=3.6MB

Sounds like mem usage is somewhat linear related to size of the binaries.

Mario


--
Tact is the ability to tell a man he has an open mind when he has a
hole in his head.

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]