RE: Huge executables when compiling in Windows
- From: Øyvind Lode <oyvind.lode@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 20:54:54 +0200
Bill:
Ahh, that's probably the reason why.
I have not stripped down anything, not that I'm aware of though.
I compiled using the following command (both on Windows and Linux):
$ gcc -Wall -o hello hello.c
I'll probably need to do some reading on gcc <smile>
-----Original Message-----
From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bill Gallik
Sent: 13. juli 2010 17:30
To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Huge executables when compiling in Windows
My first question, are the executables "stripped" on either Linux or
Windows? Stripping removes the symbol tables that allow for debugging,
those symbols are fine when a program is in development and you may need to
step through the executable code in order to identify any problem areas but
when the executable is "ready for prime time" it shouldn't need those
symbols dragged along.
And I'm going to make an editorial point here concerning Linux/Unix versus
Windows; this is just another talking point for why Linux/Unix is a superior
OS. Programming in Windows seems to me to be much more controlled whereas
in Linux/Unix the programmer is given a freer reign on how the program is
constructed. But then I was a Unix system programmer for Bell Labs for many
years and I am definitely biased.
----
Holland's Person, Bill
E-Mail: BillGallik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- The early bird may get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese!
__________
View the list's information and change your settings at
//www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
__________
View the list's information and change your settings at
//www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
Other related posts:
