From: Jerry Fritschle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 10:47:06 -0600
People are strangely obsessive about this.
Agreed. Yes, it makes a "hello world" app bigger than it could be,
but for most real-world apps you need a large chunk of that
functionality anyway. And for something like a game, the size of
the framework is dwarfed by the size of your resources (graphics,
sounds, etc.). So I agree that it's an odd thing to obsess about.
I almost LOL'd. These threads about the built-app size have been
going on for years. I recall a thread, years ago, where the posters
were obsessed with the question of whose IDE made the smallest "Hello
World." Very little talk occurred about the size of apps of
considerable complexity. It was always "My 'Hello World' is smaller
than yours, nyeah nyeah."
Now that RB can make shell apps, it's large size is more of a problem
than ever.
A shell tool is supposed to be a small tool that loads as fast as
possible. This way, you can make many small tools, that can cooperate
with each other and be chained or piped to each other in funny unix
ways.
You'd expect a shell tool to load and quit many times per second,
because some apps need to call them many times per second, but with
RB it can take a few seconds to load the RB made shell tool :(
So, let's say one RB shell tool takes 2MB. In C it could be done in 8K.
Now lets say you needed to make 5 of these tools to cooperate with
each other. Lets say in C the total size would be 40KB. With RB, it's
10MB.
So you get a 10BMB download instead of a 40KB download. And all of
this makes for slow coding.
It's not really the unix way of doing things.
Shame really.
--
http://elfdata.com/plugin/
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
Search the archives of this list here:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
