Re: Abnormal .EXE size with Turbo C 2.0

Article View: comp.sys.ibm.pc.programmer

Article #980

Back to comp.sys.ibm.pc.programmer Previous Next

#980

From: Jeffrey R Stone
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 1990 11:40

7 lines
774 bytes

One reason for the extra size is the static buffer declaration (whether
global or not).  Most compiler/linkers seem to include each 0-byte in the
.EXE, rather that a place holder for 30,000 of them.  If you allocate the
buffer from heap at run-time, the .EXE overhead should go away (you'll have
some extra for the malloc() code, if you were'nt already using it).

-jeff-

Technical Details

Message-ID: <1990Jul16.114036.15776@world.std.com>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!samsung!xylogics!world!jstone

References: <50987@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!samsung!xylogics!world!jstone
From: jstone@world.std.com (Jeffrey R Stone)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.programmer
Subject: Re: Abnormal .EXE size with Turbo C 2.0
Message-ID: <1990Jul16.114036.15776@world.std.com>
Date: 16 Jul 90 11:40:36 GMT
References: <50987@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu>
Distribution: comp
Organization: The World @ Software Tool & Die
Lines: 7

Reply to Parent Message