Xref:	news2.mv.net comp.os.msdos.djgpp:4846
From:	Mark Habersack <grendel AT ananke DOT amu DOT edu DOT pl>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: Why are they so fat?
Date:	Tue, 11 Jun 1996 15:58:49 +0200
Organization:	Adam Mickiewicz University
Lines:	45
Message-ID:	<Pine.NEB.3.93.960611154319.244A-100000@ananke.amu.edu.pl>
References:	<29C186D7EED AT fs2 DOT mt DOT umist DOT ac DOT uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	ananke.amu.edu.pl
Mime-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<29C186D7EED@fs2.mt.umist.ac.uk>
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

On Tue, 11 Jun 1996, A.Appleyard wrote:

> On Mon, 10 Jun 1996, A.Appleyard wrote:
> > The extra bulk that Martin Krieger complains of, is NOT insignificant for a
> > user who has to keep a lot of compiled djgpp .EXE's. In a nearly full disk,
> > such extra bits of store usage per file add up.
> 
>   Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> replied:-
> > If that hurts, you should compress your .EXE files. Get DJP (the
> > DJGPP-specific exe compressor) and run it on all your programs. ...
> 
> Having to uncompress each program as I need it would be a pain in the neck.
  But you don't have to uncompress anything! DJP takes care of it with its
stub, it's just like pklite or lz!

> How much extra work
> would it involve to give djgpp an option to tell it to compile a program to
> run in real-mode? to save the user from having to clutter his computer with a
> second compiler for stray needs to compile small real-mode programs.

Well, I think it would require a _LOTS_OF_ work to make djgpp produce
real-mode code. First of all it would mean going into incompatibility with GNU
C++ which is 32-bit only, besides small real-mode programs are only few KB
smaller than the same ones compiled with DJGPP and then compressed with DJP.
Making DJGPP produce 16-bit programs would require reworking the entire code
generation modules, providing separate standard libraries - probably doubling
the disk space needed for DJGPP (not mentioning the need to re-write GDB and
other utilities to work with 16-bit code) - this way you would end up with a
package the like of Borland C++ with 100 MB of your HDD storage eaten up just
to produce 16-bit programs - does it pay off? 
 If you need small real-mode programs, why don't you download one of the
free C/C++ compilers that can be found on the net? (I assume that by "small
real-mode programs" you mean little apps to test ideas, algorithms etc. that
do not require super-high-quality code to be produced by a compiler). These
compilers are so small that one cannot talk about "cluttering disk space". 
  Regards
    Mark

/*******************************/
/** So here I am once more... **************************************/
/** When you grown up and leave your playground, where you kissed **/
/** your Prince and found your Frog - remember the Jester that    **/
/** showed you tears, a Script for Tears... ************************/
/*********************************************/

- Raw text -