Re: Configuration options [was: Policy question - to PM3D or not to PM3D?]

[Hans-Bernhard B. <br...@ph...>]

Ethan A Merritt wrote:

> issue?  Is there reason to believe that the size difference on non-unix
> platforms will be greater that 10%?  

On the platforms I'm concerned about, it will be larger than 10%, simply 
because the program itself will already have to be considerably smaller 
there.  So the figure to keep in mind is the absolute size of the PM3D 
code, not the relative change.  That appears to be 100 kB, for the 
Unix-based case.  16-bit code tends to be smaller, so it won't be quite 
as much on DOS or Win16.  Current status is that enabling PM3D brings 
the DOS16 build (very small term.h) from 633264 bytes to 704960 bytes.
The 633K version still doesn't quite work yet.  But there's no way a 
704960-byte program can run on DOS.  If I turn off essentially *all* 
optional features (string vars, PM3d, image, histograms, ...), I get 
down to 592560 bytes.

So yes, at the moment PM3D is currently contributing a major part to 
breaking the DOS build's back.

> If I recall correctly, PM3D per se is not a problem even for 16-bit
> DOS. It's the PostScript driver that is the killer, because its text
> section contains huge blocks of PostScript prolog string data.

For now, I have to remove the postscript driver to come close to a 
buildable DOS 16-bit version.  Win16 should be a different story.