We do that, of course, but compiling python without the doc strings removes those from all built-in modules as well. That's quite a lot of static data. K
-----Original Message----- From: Victor Stinner [mailto:victor.stin...@gmail.com] Sent: 27. janúar 2013 21:58 To: Kristján Valur Jónsson Cc: R. David Murray; python-dev@python.org Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Anyone building Python --without-doc-strings? Why don't you compile using python -OO and distribute only .pyo code? Victor 2013/1/27 Kristján Valur Jónsson <krist...@ccpgames.com>: > We (CCP) are certainly compiling python without docstrings for our > embedded platforms (that include the PS3) Anyone using python as en engine to > be used by programs and not users will appreciate the deletion of unneeded > memory. > K > > -----Original Message----- > From: Python-Dev > [mailto:python-dev-bounces+kristjan=ccpgames....@python.org] On Behalf > Of R. David Murray > Sent: 27. janúar 2013 00:38 > To: python-dev@python.org > Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Anyone building Python --without-doc-strings? > > On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 17:19:32 +0100, Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net> > wrote: >> On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 17:03:59 +0100 >> Stefan Krah <ste...@bytereef.org> wrote: >> > Stefan Krah <ste...@bytereef.org> wrote: >> > > I'm not sure how accurate the output is for measuring these >> > > things, but according to ``ls'' and ``du'' the option is indeed quite >> > > worthless: >> > > >> > > ./configure CFLAGS="-Os -s" LDFLAGS="-s" && make >> > > 1.8M Jan 26 16:36 python >> > > ./configure --without-doc-strings CFLAGS="-Os -s" LDFLAGS="-s" && make >> > > 1.6M Jan 26 16:33 python >> > >> > The original contribution *was* in fact aiming for "10% smaller", see: >> > >> > http://docs.python.org/release/2.3/whatsnew/node20.html >> > >> > So apparently people thought it was useful. >> >> After a bit of digging, I found the following discussions: >> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2001-November/018444.html >> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2002-January/019392.html >> http://bugs.python.org/issue505375 >> >> Another reason for accepting the patch seemed to be that it >> introduced the Py_DOCSTR() macros, which were viewed as helpful for >> other reasons (some people talked about localizing docstrings). >> >> I would point out that if 200 KB is really a big win for someone, >> then Python (and especially Python 3) is probably not the best >> language for them. >> >> It is also ironic how the executable size went up since then (from >> 0.6 to more than 1.5 MB) :-) > > 200K can make a difference. It does on the QNX platform, for example, > where there is no virtual memory. It would be nice to reduce that > executable size, too....but I'm not volunteering to try (at least not > yet) :) > > --David > _______________________________________________ > Python-Dev mailing list > Python-Dev@python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev > Unsubscribe: > http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/kristjan%40ccpgames. > com > > > _______________________________________________ > Python-Dev mailing list > Python-Dev@python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev > Unsubscribe: > http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/victor.stinner%40gma > il.com _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
