Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!mcsun!hp4nl!charon!dik
From: dik@cwi.nl (Dik T. Winter)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Speed costs (Re: MWC's Coherent - A Lemon...)
Message-ID: <1599@charon.cwi.nl>
Date: 4 Jun 90 00:46:05 GMT
References: <3886@darkstar.ucsc.edu> <136369@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> <27415@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU>
Sender: news@cwi.nl
Organization: CWI, Amsterdam
Lines: 18

In article <27415@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU> pjg@acsu.Buffalo.EDU (Paul Graham) writes:
 > 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).
 > 
 > 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.

Oh dear, and I am using xpclock which is larger than xclock and likes CPU.
Though I do not use it on a Sun 3, otherwise I could do nothing any more
on it.
--
dik t. winter, cwi, amsterdam, nederland
dik@cwi.nl