Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!usc!jarthur!nntp-server.caltech.edu!mustang!data.nas.nasa.gov!xenon.arc.nasa.gov!dueker
From: dueker@xenon.arc.nasa.gov (The Code Slinger)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer
Subject: Re: How are some programs SO DAMN SMALL!
Keywords: small,assembler,c,arexx
Message-ID: <1991Feb18.174841.2498@nas.nasa.gov>
Date: 18 Feb 91 16:41:40 GMT
References: <1991Jan20.210328.18087@hoss.unl.edu> <28077.279c3c3f@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> <11295.tnews@templar.actrix.gen.nz>
Sender: dueker@xenon.arc.nasa.gov
Reply-To: dueker@xenon.arc.nasa.gov
Organization: Computer Sciences Corp
Lines: 23
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4

jbickers@templar.actrix.gen.nz (John Bickers) writes...
> 
>    Regardless of the pedantic aspects of all this, the only reasonable
>    solution to the problem of what to guage program size by is the size
>    of the file that gets executed.
> 
>    The user can then watch out for themselves with respect to what other
>    overhead may be involved.
> 
To this I wholeheartedly agree.  However (adding my $.02):

I claim that the term "executed" does not apply to ascii text, ie, shell
scripts, etc, because that kind of "code" is more correctly interpreted
(whatever I mean by that).  It should apply to the "machine code" on
whichever machine (read: computer) is involved in the discussion.

Chris
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Ah, Benson, you are so mercifully free of the ravages of intellegence!"
"Oh, thank you, Master!"             - from the movie, TIME BANDITS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
dueker@xenon.arc.nasa.gov        |   Chris Dueker (The Code Slinger)
duke@well.sf.ca.us               |   Mtn. View, CA  (Sillycon Valley!)