From: mdruiter AT cs DOT vu DOT nl (Ruiter de M) Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: DJGPP vs Borland C++ Date: 31 Jan 1997 10:03:15 GMT Organization: Fac. Wiskunde & Informatica, VU, Amsterdam Lines: 37 Message-ID: <5csg13$s6m@star.cs.vu.nl> References: <32F22F8B DOT 12AE AT olis DOT net DOT au> NNTP-Posting-Host: sloep27.cs.vu.nl To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Linley Henzell (zel AT olis DOT net DOT au) wrote: : As opposed to Borland C++ 3.1. I get two types of warnings: : warning: passing unsigned char [or whatever] as arg x of "foo(..., ... : etc)" changes signedness, : and another warning about inlining the "read" & "write" file I/O : functions. As BC never complained about these, and as they don't seem to : affect my program in any noticeable way, I'm ignoring them. Maybe you _should_ try to fix these warnings, because they (especially those generated with -Wall, compared to -W) are real, WARNING-warnings (huhuh), i.e. they _warn_ you. Post the warnings and I/someone else may be able to help you. : > > and the doubling of my .exe file from : > > ~150K to over 300K, but I can cope with that. : > : > Add -s switch to the gcc link command line, and you will get back to 150K : > or so. : : I tried adding -s to the linker options under RHide 1.1, but this didn't : work. I'm already using fstrength-reduce, and I think that without : either of these, my .exe output file ballooned out to over 500K. Hmmm. Is that strength-reduce-bug still in gcc? I'm not sure about this (soneone?), but maybe you should try without it. It's just an optimize- option. Doesn't help much against executable-size. Normaly, my small C++ programs are around 160K or so. Are you using other libraries? Or is it a very large program? Please post some code. Or is it topsecret-software? :) -- Groeten, Michel. http://www.cs.vu.nl/~mdruiter \----/==\----/ \ / \ / "Life is cool.", Beavis. \/ \/