From:	sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann)
Message-Id:	<10206170113.AA18927@clio.rice.edu>
Subject:	Re: DJGPP 2.04 performance & size
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date:	Sun, 16 Jun 2002 20:13:14 -0500 (CDT)
Cc:	eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il (Eli Zaretskii)
In-Reply-To:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.1020616092030.26367O-100000@is> from "Eli Zaretskii" at Jun 16, 2002 09:20:59 AM
X-Mailer:	ELM [version 2.5 PL2]
Mime-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

> I'm more interested in speed differences than in size differences.

Simple example, in my C:\DJGPP directory, elapsed time:

ls -lR > nul
                   elapsed     size
v2.00 beta 4     5 seconds    72,704
v2.03 refresh   13 seconds   129,024
v2.04 (cvs)     25 seconds   145,408

- Raw text -