🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1123@crpmks.UUCP> garyb@crpmks.UUCP (Gary Blumenstein) writes:
$Could someone offer a plausible explaination as to why the linker
$is so much bigger than MASM.EXE?  My guess is that the linker needs
$more workspace than the assembler (but for what?).  Another guess
$is that it must somehow link object code with routines in DOS when
$programming with interrupts, therefore there might be "libraries" 
$built in to the linker making it larger?

   I don't know what versions of MASM and LINK you're using ... my
MASM V4.00 is 83165 bytes, and none of my LINKs is bigger than
50531 bytes (V3.55).

   A stripped-to-the-bones linker can come in under 10K (check out
Borland's TLINK.EXE from Turbo C 1.0 - it's 9753 bytes); I would
imagine that more recent versions of the DOS linker (which handle
overlays) would have to have the overlay manager built-in, but
even that shouldn't add too much to the size.

-- 
Stephen M. Dunn                               cs4g6ag@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca
          <std_disclaimer.h> = "\nI'm only an undergraduate!!!\n";
****************************************************************************
               I Think I'm Going Bald - Caress of Steel, Rush