Compiler: Size of generated executable file

[retard]

Sat, 09 Jan 2010 18:15:44 -0500, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

> "retard" <re at tard.com.invalid> wrote in message
> news:hiavkv$1meu$1 at digitalmars.com...
>> Sat, 09 Jan 2010 19:44:07 +0100, grauzone wrote:
>>
>>> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>>>> "Ph" <romanua at gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:hia7qc$b5k$1 at digitalmars.com...
>>>>> Why a generated file is so huge?
>>>>> "Empty" program such as:
>>>>>
>>>>> int main(char[][] args)
>>>>> {
>>>>>
>>>>> return 0;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> compiled with dmd2 into file with size of  266268 bytes. Even after
>>>>> UPX, it's size is 87552 bytes. Size of this code,compiled with
>>>>> VS(yes,yes, C++), is 6 656 bytes. Compiler add's standard library 
>>>>> to file, am i right? Is there some optimization which delete unused
>>>>> code from file?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> That's not even a third of a megabyte, why does this keep getting
>>>> brought up as an issue by so many people?
>>>
>>> Maybe most of them don't know that it's only constant overheads.
>>
>> Are you sure it's a constant overhead? I've written few thousands of
>> lines in D and it always seems that if you port the same code to C++,
>> Java or C#, not only is the constant overhead larger, the binaries seem
>> to grow quite fast.
>>
>> E.g. if I link against some GUI lib, the hello world window+label grows
>> to 2..5 MB. In Java the same app using Swing is still only a few
>> kilobytes (label + window + procedure to close the app is 1.2 kB to be
>> precise). Note that the Java app provides even better runtime
>> reflection capabilities that D can. I would imagine a larger program
>> that uses network, sound, graphics, and some other domain specific
>> libraries would need a 50..100 MB binary .exe file when done in D.
> 
> I'd rather use an app that did a bunch of compile-time reflection than
> one that did a bunch of run-time reflection. And I think that 50..100 MB
> figure seems quite exaggerated unless you're packing all those art+sound
> assets into the exe itself (or if you're using that one GUI lib that's
> been known to result in really inflated exe's, forget which one that
> was...).

I've tried both - GTK+ bindings and the SWT port by frank benoit. Both 
are HUEG