ko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > File size is not the culprit here. Please consider the following :
It's size, MACROs and inlines. > On the gcc-2.95.3 platform, interface_glade2.c compiles fine, > though it takes some time. > > On the gcc-3.2.1 platform, compilation goes ok for a while, > then suddenly saturates mem and swap, to no avail for 30 seconds It *might* be a problem in gcc 3.x but, please, consider that gcc 2.xx and gcc 3.xx are totally different branches. IIRC, they have rewritten the whole backend e.g., to have better portable optimization. AFAIK, gcc 3.2 write much better code, does much better optimization and, of course, it has many new features than the old 2.95.3. > 1) Use libglade to parse the UI at runtime. As you wrote: more dependencies and slower at runtime. > 2) We can take the code to create each tab's content off > create_main_window() and create_dlg_filters() and put it each in > its own window in another glade project. Then we use some code at > runtime to reparent the widgets right where they should be. IMO, that's the way to go. Richard has already suggested and considered this. Until then, -O0 should be the default for gcc when compiling GtkG with GTK+2. It also saves you a lot of time, doesn't interfere with debugging information and I doubt you notice the difference with GtkG at all. Christian
msg00063/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
