Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 13:19:33 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: pavenis AT lanet DOT lv
cc: Laurynas Biveinis <lauras AT softhome DOT net>, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: gcc-3.0
In-Reply-To: <3B31DFC5.18980.6CD900@localhost>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010621131654.9042D-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Thu, 21 Jun 2001 pavenis AT lanet DOT lv wrote:

> #include <iostream>
> 
> int main(void)
> {
> 	std::cout << "Hello\n";
> }
> 
> --------------------------------
> after 'gpp -O2 hello.cc -o hello.exe' I'm getting the size of executable
> (with gcc-3.0) size 1182238 bytes, after stripping it - 257536 bytes and
> after compressing it with UPX 1.20 (option --best): 91068 bytes

What is the size of unstripped executable when libgcc.a is unstripped, as 
opposed to stripped libgcc.a?

In other words, from this example it is not clear how much of this bloat 
comes from libgcc.a and how much comes from libtsdc++.a and the code 
emitted by the compiler.

(The general fact that GCC 3.0 generates monstrously large executable is 
known quite well.  What can you expect from such a monstrously large 
language, anyway?)