Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!sunybcs!pjg
From: pjg@acsu.Buffalo.EDU (Paul Graham)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Speed costs (Re: MWC's Coherent - A Lemon...)
Message-ID: <27415@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU>
Date: 3 Jun 90 21:25:19 GMT
References: <265D2FE5.2513@tct.uucp> <640@sibyl.eleceng.ua.OZ> <136298@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> <3886@darkstar.ucsc.edu> <136369@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>
Sender: news@acsu.Buffalo.EDU
Lines: 13

lm@snafu.Sun.COM (Larry McVoy) writes:

|keller@saturn.ucsc.edu (Jeffrey M. Keller) writes:
|>Your xclock binary is 1.3Meg?  It's 48K in X11R4 under SunOs 4.0.3 (sparc).

|Yeah?  Tell me about it.  That executable is dynamically linked.  Go take
|a look at how much it uses when it is in memory.

i wouldn't comment on this except that some folks might think "aha that darned
x" (well they will anyway but so what).  i don't use xclock but i fired one up
and darned if it didn't check in at 844K.  foo on that.  the clock program i
do use weighs in at 136K.  the private portion of my xclock has 32K of code
while dclock has 205K of code.  both are dynamically linked.