On 03/03/09 13:12, Dennis Benzinger wrote: > Hi Markus! > > Am 03.03.2009 11:14, Markus Heidelberg schrieb: >> Dennis Benzinger, 03.03.2009: >>> Hi! >>> >>> Am 03.03.2009 06:40, James Vega schrieb: >>>> [...] >>>>> 2) Vim compiled with the --disable-multibyte configure option cannot use >>>>> UTF-8, or any other multibyte encoding; in fact it doesn't even accept >>>>> the 'encoding' option as valid. >>>> Is there a reason to allow building Vim without multibyte support? >>>> Always having multibyte support would make the code simpler/smaller. >>> It would make the code smaller but compiling without multibyte support >>> probably makes the resulting binary smaller. That can make a big >>> difference for users on resource constrained systems. >> What do you mean exactly with "resource constrained systems"? >> On an old PC, Vim with multibyte should still run fast. >> [...] > > I meant systems which have or can use only a small amount of memory. For > example (16bit) MS-DOS where you can only use 640KB. These systems may > be rare nowadays but if you'll encounter one you'd probably be happy to > be able to minimize the size of the binary. But I didn't try it out how > much the size differs between a multibyte and a non-multibyte build. > Therefore I wrote "_probably_ makes the resulting binary smaller" ;-) > > So if ripping out non-multibyte support does not make the code much > simpler or smaller I'd simply keep it. Do you have any idea much simpler > or smaller the code would be? > > > Dennis Benzinger
I did try: - vim (gvim with all bells and whistles except +mzscheme) 3370388 bytes. - vi (vim with minimal features) 508048 bytes 6.63 times smaller Both compiled on the same Linux-i686 system with the same 7.2.130 sources (but different config options), and both binaries "stripped" of their debug info. The difference consists not only of +multi_byte but of everything which I knew how to enable/disable at compile-time. These are 32-bit binaries; I suspect 16-bit builds would be smaller -- hopefully they would, because 508k is still big for a Dos machine without Extended Memory. Best regards, Tony. -- Remember, UNIX spelled backwards is XINU. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
