Re: [Silgraphite-devel] How small is small enough?

[Christoph H. <c_h...@ar...>]

Hello,

sorry for the incomplete mail. I was going to change the language for spell checking and ended up pressing the send button.

 From my point of view, I would say simpler is better in this situation. I can't really imagine a situation where saving 25K would really be necessary.
Just removing any rarely used switches seems more helpful. Easier documentation/support, fewer sources of errors or bugs...
And if someone thinks he needs a smaller library, he/she can always use the size optimization provided by the compiler.

Best regards,
Christoph

On 14.08.2012 06:26, Martin Hosken wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> We have a few -D type switches for disabling the compilation of code. Of course we could support any number of these and give all kinds of refinements (don't compile justification support, etc.). The question I have for everyone is: how much size saving justifies the addition of a switch. For example, the current sizes of a release build are:
>
> Include everything:	145K
> -DNTRACING saves 10K
> -DNFILEFACE saves 5K
> -DNSEGCACHE saves 10K
>
> are we getting to the point of diminishing returns?
>
> Yours,
> Martin
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Live Security Virtual Conference
> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
> threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
> will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
> threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
> _______________________________________________
> Silgraphite-devel mailing list
> Sil...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/silgraphite-devel
>