Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sunybcs!pjg
From: pjg@acsu.Buffalo.EDU (Paul Graham)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Speed costs (Re: MWC's Coherent - A Lemon...)
Message-ID: <27468@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU>
Date: 4 Jun 90 19:35:14 GMT
References: <3886@darkstar.ucsc.edu> <136369@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> <27415@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU> <4042@darkstar.ucsc.edu>
Sender: news@acsu.Buffalo.EDU
Lines: 13

keller@saturn.ucsc.edu (Jeffrey M. Keller) writes:

|pjg@acsu.Buffalo.EDU (Paul Graham) writes:
[lm@snafu says xclock is big i agree]

|Well, i wasn't going to comment either, but... ;-)
|As i pointed out to McVoy in email, the binary size seems to be inflated
|by the dynamic linking: in X11R3 on a Sun-3 under SunOS 3.5 (no shared
|libraries), the xclock binary is 376K.

this is not particularly supported by the fact that the clock program
i do use has a resident size less than the static text size.  it is also
dynalinked.