Sadness
Bill Baxter
dnewsgroup at billbaxter.com
Thu Mar 6 17:17:38 PST 2008
Dan wrote:
> Jascha Wetzel Wrote:
>
>> Dan wrote:
>>> I would probably take up renewed interest in D if it supported the x86-64 - both from D source and inline assembler. The x86-32 is obsolete.
>>>
>>> At that point, my only major gripe would be that hello world takes up 80kb.
>> GDC supports x86-64, i'm using it on a daily basis.
>> The large-executable-discussion has popped up repeatedly. If you're
>> interested in the results, you can search the NG.
>
> Yeah. It pops up repeatedly, and still they never fix it. It ultimately boils down to them including everything
>
> -=[ even when it's not used ]=-
>
> What use does printf("hello world"); have for the GC?
> Why does it need to have the entirety of phobos instead of just those things that printf() uses?
> It's even getting compiled in for extern(C) main() when you're not even using _moduleInit() and such.
>
> That extra 80kb of unremoveable heft is now the only reason sufficient to prevent me from using D. I can probably write my entire program in < 100kb in assembler (with huge amounts of time and dedication)
Are you doing cell phone development or something?
I think the reason it isn't getting fixed is because it's not a priority
with a lot of people. Small exe's would be great, but it's right there
real close to the bottom of the list for me. It doesn't prevent me from
doing anything I want to do.
Of course if you want to do cell phone / embedded dev, then it could
very well be preventing you. But there's kind of a viscious circle
going there. Hardly any embedded developers use D because the exes are
so big. D's exes remain so big because there are hardly any active D
developers who need it.
That plus it I think it's not easy to fix. Especially not in OPTLINK.
--bb
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list