Subject: Re: std C++ [was: [Patch] Psiconv TextEd and Word importer]
From: Thomas Fletcher (thomasf@qnx.com)
Date: Wed Dec 20 2000 - 09:43:21 CST
On Wed, 20 Dec 2000, Mike Nordell wrote:
> Thomas Fletcher wrote:
> > Yes well we might have some fat trimming to do first. Our footprint
> > (both runtime and exectable size) are a little on the big size ...
>
> Which is why I have been thinking... We have almost a half megabyte of data
> from one of our libraries. Would it be feasible to use gzip to compress that
> data before linking it (or, which I'd prefer, lzo - since it's *way* faster,
> *really* small and also GPL)? It would introduce one additional
> "pre-processing" step, but since we already got one pre-processing step to
> generate the images...
Great idea ... but what do we really gain? We get a smaller foot
print for storage (which is something), but in the end our runtime
is still just as large (in fact larger since you now have compressed
and uncompressed data unless you plan to read out the compressed
data which could turn into a performance hit depending on how often
we access it). Loading we might be faster (less to load) but might
slowdown (need to uncompress). Gains ... losses ... tough to measure
but I think that there are still some other things that we should
probably look at before going this route.
> Yes, I am a bastard, but I do deliver... What do you do...
Glad to see you stepping up to the plate buddy =;-)
Thomas
-------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas (toe-mah) Fletcher QNX Software Systems
thomasf@qnx.com Neutrino Development Group
(613)-591-0931 http://www.qnx.com/~thomasf
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Wed Dec 20 2000 - 09:39:56 CST