Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: mingwin32 (was RE: Patch for Borland C 5.5 to try out.)

Expand Messages
  • Vince Negri
    ... Still, ... a) It looks nice. :) b) It means you get a decent-looking shortcut when you right-click drag and create shortcut here c) When you use Open
    Message 1 of 3 , May 19, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      Ron Aaron wrote:
      > Vince Negri <vnegri@...> writes:
      > >1) The makefile is a bit off - the non-gui version should still
      > >use the vim.rc file to include the main icon and version info
      > OK, but why is it necessary to have an icon in a console only version?
      Still,
      > it's no hardship to include it.
      a) It looks nice. :)
      b) It means you get a decent-looking shortcut when you right-click
      drag and 'create shortcut here'
      c) When you use "Open With..." on a file, choose console vim, and
      select 'always use this program', the resulting document icon looks
      sensible.

      > >2) Even though the resulting vim.exe is tapping into msvcrt.dll,
      > >it is noticeably larger(*) than vim.exe built with VC++ v6, which
      > >has the C runtimes statically linked in. I would expect the version
      > >using the DLL to be smaller, else why bother??
      > >
      > >(*) 615K vs 592K
      >
      > First, the settings I have in the ming makefile are to maximize speed over
      > size, as I consider speed of foremost importance (anyone using syntax
      > highlighting probably concurs :-< ). BTW, after compressing with UPX, I
      have
      > a gvim.exe of only 313K, and vim.exe of 283K. YMMV.
      >
      > Second, you are comparing apples and oranges. Tell MSVC to compile for
      > maximum speed and dynamic libs,and then compare. Also, the difference
      here is
      > 23K, which is not IMHO a big deal.
      OK, after tweaking the makefile.w32 to build for maximum speed and DLL
      linking, I get a 536K app. Looked at one way, that's still only 79K.
      Looked at another way, the MSVC exe is over 12.5% smaller. That's a
      significantly higher degree of optimisation. (It UPXes to 267K, BTW)
      I was just surprised to see such a difference. It would be interesting
      to see what you get with Borland 5.5.

      Of course the acid test would be to benchmark the two as well, since
      as you rightly say the speed is the really important thing.

      >
      > If you like MSVC, don't stop using it on my account! Bill needs your
      support
      > :-)
      That's right, with all these lawyers he must be down to his last
      $100000000000000. ;)




      --
      Vince Negri (vnegri@...)
      Application Solutions Ltd. Tel:+44(0)1273-476608 Fax:+44(0)1273-478888
      Legal Disclaimer: Any views expressed by the sender of this message are
      not necessarily those of Application Solutions Ltd. Information in this
      e-mail may be confidential and is for the use of the intended recipient
      only, no mistake in transmission is intended to waive or compromise such
      privilege. Please advise the sender if you receive this e-mail by mistake.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.