TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy


Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
"Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
"W. Wesley Groleau x4923" <[log in to unmask]>
Fri, 9 Oct 1998 14:12:01 -0500
"W. Wesley Groleau x4923" <[log in to unmask]>
text/plain (23 lines)
>   Con: Some compilers (especialy older ones) include a huge run-time
>        library in each executable, even for small and simple programs.

For what it's worth, when we ported a large system from Alsys/HPUX to Apex
2.x/Solaris, the sizes of _stripped_ executables became MUCH bigger than
the former unstripped ones.  However, when we upgraded Apex to 3.0, the
difference was made much smaller.

Verdix five years ago would put EVERYTHING in the library in your
executable--including things that were neither directly nor indirectly
with'ed by your main program!  (I hope it's fixed by now)

But the point of my response was to hint that any increase in code size
solely due to tasking may be matched by the size of any other language
which calls non-built-in equivalent capabilities.

> Even in C, with a good compiler, you're better off with machine
> optimization.  ......

Kernighan and Plauger, way back in _1978_ wrote, "Don't sacrifice clarity
for small gains in 'efficiency.'....Let your compiler do the simple