[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Erik van der Poel) wrote:

>Simon Montagu wrote:
>> 
>> It turned out to be chiefly because of some data tables that were in
>> intl\unicharutils\public\nsIBidiUtils.h instead of
>> intl\unicharutils\src\nsBidiUtilsImp.h where they belong.
>
>I had a look at the nsIUBidiUtils.h file attached to the bug report:
>
>  http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=62777
>
>Those tables are static, right? I think static tables should be in *.cpp
>files, since *.h files are often #included by more than one *.cpp file.
>Is nsBidiUtilsImp.h only included by one *.cpp file? If so, why is that
>stuff in a separate *.h file?
>

Fair enough, I'll move them into nsBidiUtilsImp.cpp

>> Here is an
>> updated list after correcting that and removing some superfluous
>> includes:
>
>Did any of those "superfluous includes" contain static tables, like the
>one above?

I didn't find any other static tables, but the one above was included
unnecessarily in a lot of different places

>
>> File                 NonBidi size Bidi size   Bloat  %bloat
>> 
>> components\editor.dll      347136    348672    1536    0.44
>> components\gkhtml.dll     1674752   1704960   30208    1.80
>> components\mozbrwsr.dll     24064     25600    1536    6.38
>> components\rdf.dll         293888    294400     512    0.17
>> components\ucharuti.dll     16896     34816   17920  106.06
>> components\ucvibm.dll       16384     17408    1024    6.25
>> gkgfxwin.dll               118272    120320    2048    1.73
>> gkwidget.dll               107520    108032     512    0.48
>> jsdom.dll                  434688    435200     512    0.12
>> rdfcat.exe                   6656      7168     512    7.69
>> TestAttributes.exe        1268736   1290240   21504    1.69
>> TestCSSParser.exe           37888     41984    4096   10.81
>> viewer.exe                 121344    121856     512    0.42
>
>What happened to all the other things you listed earlier, like nsgif,
>etc?

All files not in the above list are now exactly the same size in Bidi
and non-Bidi builds.

Simon

Reply via email to