Roman Cheplyaka-2 wrote > I'm not denying (or confirming) your claim, but it would look more > legitimate if you compared the same version of Cabal compiled with > different versions of GHC. > > At least some of this bloat could be because Cabal simply gained more > code.
Tricky to test that because of dependencies and global package db. I haven't measured the amount of code in Cabal, but I doubt it's increased that much, and there has been a big jump in the installed size of every library. -- View this message in context: http://haskell.1045720.n5.nabble.com/Binary-bloat-in-7-10-tp5768067p5768080.html Sent from the Haskell - Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
