On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 02:32:20PM -0400, Tim Peters wrote: > [Jeremy Hylton] > > I would like to see some compression in the release, but agree that it > > is not an essential optimization. People have talked about it for a > > couple of months, and we haven't found someone to work on it because > > at various times pirx and /F said they were working on it. > > > > If we don't hear from /F by tomorrow promising he will finish it before > > the beta release, let's postpone it. > There was an *awful* lot of whining about the size increase without this > optimization, and the current situation violates the "no compiler warnings!" > rule too (at least under MSVC 6). For the record, you can't compile unicodedatabase.c with g++ because of it's size: g++ complains that the switch is too large to compile. Under gcc it compiles, but only by trying really really hard, and I don't know how it performs under other versions of gcc (in particular more heavily optimizing ones -- might run into other limits in those situations.) -- Thomas Wouters <thomas@xs4all.net> Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread!
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4