Xref: news-dnh.mv.net comp.os.msdos.djgpp:1345
Path: news-dnh.mv.net!mv!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!jobone!fiesta.srl.ford.com!ef2007!usenet
From: kvandel AT austinc DOT edu (Kurt)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: ** Comparison between DJGPP V2 & WATCOM C V10 **
Date: 2 Aug 1995 15:21:26 GMT
Organization: Ford
Lines: 21
References: <3vl892$4q AT news DOT irisa DOT fr> <3vlbk8$58b AT odin DOT diku DOT dk> <3vmbge$ekf AT sun001 DOT spd DOT dsccc DOT com>
Nntp-Posting-Host: pgt220.cpd.ford.com
To: djgpp AT sun DOT soe DOT clarkson DOT edu
Dj-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

In article <3vmbge$ekf AT sun001 DOT spd DOT dsccc DOT com>, jmccarty AT spd DOT dsccc DOT com says...
>

>)Don't stay up at night waiting.  Very few of those who have contributed
>)really give a damn about the size of "Hello, world!" compiled.
>)
>)Cut out the excess stuff yourself.  I don't think anyone else cares
>)enough to do it for you; we run applications, not hello-worlds.
>)
>)Morten
>This is about the 2nd most ridiculous post I've seen on such subjects.
>This fellow has hard facts to support a claim. You present nothing but

I beleive you have misunderstood what morten was saying.  The difference in 
generated output with smaller programs, like hello world, seem to have huge 
differences.  But when you have a program that is 1MB in size and another is 
1.07MB, the difference is nominal.
If djgpp consistently generates exes 3x bigger than watcoms compiler, then it 
would be relavent information to be concerned about. From my experience, this 
is not the case.