Date:	Tue, 28 Mar 2000 05:40:59 +0600 (LKT)
From:	Kalum Somaratna aka Grendel <kalum AT lintux DOT cx>
X-Sender:	root AT darkstar DOT grendel DOT net
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: EXE files too big!
In-Reply-To:	<8bn3j1$6ct$1@antares.lu.erisoft.se>
Message-ID:	<Pine.LNX.4.10.10003280538500.1006-100000@darkstar.grendel.net>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	dj-admin AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On 27 Mar 2000, Martin Stromberg wrote:

> Krogg (krogg DOT no DOT to DOT spam AT gtcom DOT net) wrote:
> : I am gonna try one more thing....
> : Ok i tried the -s switch and the -O2 switch AND upx.
> : ended up with..........................119268 bytes
> 
> : Now,that IS a little better...Now someone is gonna
> : tell me that the -O2 switch is some kind of bad thing
> : that i will wish i hadnt ever heard of......
> 
> Au contraire. If your program isn't very special, it's very much
> recommended that you do compile with "-O2". It's insane not to use at
> least "-O"; if you don't believe me, look at the code generated by gcc
> without "-O".

IMHO the -O3 switch is even better, as it provides better optimisations,
and I still have to tun into any problems with it being likely to
introduce optimiser errors into the code. AFAIK Allegro uses the -O3
switch without any problem...

Grendel

Hi, I'm a signature virus. plz set me as your signature and help me spread
:)

- Raw text -