Size of 2.009 vs 2.010 zipfile releases, what got trimmed?

[Sean Kelly]

Neal Alexander wrote:
> David L. Davis wrote:
>> Walter Bright Wrote:
>>
>>> bug fixing
>>>
>>> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html
>>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.026.zip
>>>
>>> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
>>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.2.010.zip
>>
>> Walter, I noticed that size of D v2.009's zip was 334Kb larger than
>> the current D v2.010's zip...I'm curious as to what got trimmed?
>> David
> 
> IIRC the size of binaries dmd produces went up for no apparent reason
> between 2.07 or 2.08 -> 2.09 (on win32 at least).

Historically, this has been from additions to the TypeInfo objects.  Was
there an increase in D 1.0 executable sizes as well?


Sean