Jonathan, I may be completely off the mark here, but some optimizations involve code unrolling and duplication so this could be the caso for the object size. And I assume you're talking about the stripped binary in both cases. And by the way why are you worried about the code size increase in xfractint? Regs HB
-----Mensaje original----- De: fractdev-admin@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:fractdev-admin@mailman.xmission.com]En nombre de Jonathan Osuch Enviado el: Miércoles, 19 de Diciembre de 2001 23:21 Para: fractdev@mailman.xmission.com Asunto: Re: [Fractdev] Xfractint compiler optimizations
Tim,
I have looked into using indent. It's fine for new development or situations when you are willing to redo all the comments. It's bad for legacy code created by many people, because almost invariably careful formatting of comments gets messed up.
Currently, the default style of indent is the GNU style. I used it on video.c and the comments were virtually untouched. I like the results. As expected, the file size increased (from 16216 bytes to 17049 bytes). Don't try this at home, I have already modified the file to clear up the -Wall warnings. Unfortunately, the object file size also increased (from 49984 bytes to 50080 bytes). Not much, but I'm a little uneasy about it. I looked at the before and after C files and couldn't see any obvious reason for the different object file sizes.
Jonathan
_______________________________________________ Fractdev mailing list Fractdev@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fractdev