Re: Dead code elimination

clyde@hitech.com.au (Clyde Smith-Stubbs)
Fri, 1 Nov 91 22:43:48 GMT

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
Dead code elimination whatis@ucsd.edu (Steve Boswell) (1991-10-26)
re: Dead code elimination chuck_lins1@gateway.qm.apple.com (Chuck Lins) (1991-10-28)
Re: Dead code elimination henry@zoo.toronto.edu (1991-10-29)
Re: Dead code elimination clyde@hitech.com.au (1991-11-01)
Re: Dead code elimination henry@zoo.toronto.edu (1991-11-05)
Re: Dead code elimination schwartz@roke.cs.psu.edu (1991-11-05)
Re: Dead code elimination dd@mips.com (1991-11-05)
Re: Dead code elimination eggert@twinsun.com (1991-11-06)
Re: Dead Code Elimination preston@dawn.cs.rice.edu (1991-11-07)
dead code elimination preston@dawn.cs.rice.edu (1991-11-26)
[1 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
From: clyde@hitech.com.au (Clyde Smith-Stubbs)
Keywords: C, linker
Organization: HI-TECH Software, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
References: 91-10-106 91-10-109 91-10-113
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 91 22:43:48 GMT

henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:
>I fear that the bulk of stuff brought in by printf nowadays is probably not
>conversions, but bloated versions of support facilities like the i/o library.




I'd still like to know why a simple printf("Hello world\n"); when compiled
with cc -n on my Sun produces a 94K program! No wonder they had to
implement dynamic linking! And that 94K includes over 40K code AND over
40K data! Does anyone have any idea what it is all for?


For comparison, the same program produces an executable file size of 7K
from our 386 compiler. Still rather a lot, but a hell of a lot less than 94K!
--
  Clyde Smith-Stubbs | HI-TECH Software, | Voice: +61 7 300 5011
  clyde@hitech.com.au | P.O. Box 103, Alderley, | Fax: +61 7 300 5246
  ...!nwnexus!hitech!clyde | QLD, 4051, AUSTRALIA. | BBS: +61 7 300 5235
--

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.