Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!psuvax1!news From: melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Re: Peter, can you explain to the Amigoids (was: NeXT software size Message-ID: Date: 7 May 91 01:47:31 GMT References: <*05Gx0x&1@cs.psu.edu> <11877@uwm.edu> Sender: news@cs.psu.edu (Usenet) Organization: Penn State Computer Science Lines: 27 In-Reply-To: gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu's message of 7 May 91 00:30:55 GMT Nntp-Posting-Host: sunws5.sys.cs.psu.edu In article <11877@uwm.edu> gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Gregory R Block) writes: Okay, I'll try again, because you're just not seeing what I see. Any given processor can only run so many instructions per second, right? Right. So if there are lots more instructions to run, it will be slower, right? Right. The symbol table is include with the executable(I'm pretty sure of this). The NeXT compiler is GCC. Why would it generate more code on the NeXT than it would on the Amiga? Do you really thing that you have the best compilers in the business on the Amiga? Get real! > -rwxr-xr-x 1 melling wheel 16384 May 6 18:13 a.out* That does tell me quite a bit. 16k to simply say "Hello, World". Oh, boy. That's advanced. Even the A3000UX compiles it at something like 1100 bytes. Maybe your programs could be a little slimmer. Or maybe it's just the NeXT problem in your list of many. Ok idiot. I gave two examples. One was only 1300 bytes, and it was the *same* program. Get someone else to explain why the program is 16K. I'll get you a hint. Internal fragmantation. -Mike