Mail Archives: djgpp/2009/05/16/18:31:12
Hi,
On May 14, 1:40=A0am, Blair Campbell <blaird DOT DOT DOT AT gmail DOT com> wrote:
>
> I recently compiled perl 5.10.0 with DJ-ELF and it sometimes comes in
> handy to have perl with some modules for configure scripts.
Perl 5.6.1 was like half the size of 5.8.8. I don't like it when
things double in size in such a relatively short time. Not saying Perl
isn't useful, but it bothers me that everything was Perl 5 forever
(why? was Perl 4 useless?). Perl 6 has been in planning for a long
time, several rough implementations exist, but it's incompatible
(another rewrite).
perl561 exe 1,192,448 Dec,15,2003 11:03:24pm A...
perl588 exe 4,330,496 May,11,2007 03:03:20am A...
(Note that the comparison isn't completely accurate, lots of stuff got
improved, Unicode, threading, plus the 5.6.1 shown above apparently
uses 2.04 while the below is 2.03p2, not sure why I downloaded
different ones back in the day.)
GDB 7.0 will include libpython for scripting, and we already have
PythonD 2.4.2 ported to DJGPP, but I've never tested it. However, the
weird thing is that GDB's CVS only shows about 8 files in /python/, so
either they managed to greatly simplify it or maybe it's not as
bloated as it looks. Python 2.0's main addition was Unicode, and then
came 2.2, 2.4, 2.6.2 is latest "compatible" with a few backported
features while 3.1b1 (beta) is the incompatible branch. Just like Perl
6, they will support some automatic translation between old 2.x and
new 3.x, but it just seems like such a moving target, I just wonder
how useful something is if it gets deprecated so quickly.
3,920,947 Python-2.0.1.tgz
6,410,852 Python-2.2.3.tgz
8,154,677 Python-2.4.6.tar.bz2
11,156,901 Python-2.6.2.tar.bz2
Note that these are source files, and I used AdvanceComp (advdef -z4)
on the .tgz files, so they are smaller than default. But what the heck
happened to make it so bloated?? More tests? Better docs? More
platforms? (Doubt it. I think we all know that most people only care
for the big 3, if even.) Even uses better compression (bzip2) and is
still lots bigger!
207,202 lua-5.1.4.tar.gz
Now I know why Lua is so popular, it's tiny!! Why they didn't just use
that instead of Python for GDB 7.0 I'll never know. But I guess Python
is more popular and better supported than the others. (Yet DoomRL and
Dungeon Crawl: Stone Soup both use Lua, from within FPC and C++,
respectively. I think World of Warcraft also uses it.)
BTW, IIRC, Ruby 1.8.4 was the last to be ported to DJGPP, and it was
fairly large too. Unfortunately, they are apparently more incompatible
with minor version upgrades than the others! Latest is 1.9.1 which has
YARV integrated (faster), plus no more green threads, relies on
underlying OS support.
ftp://ftp.ruby-lang.org/pub/ruby/binaries/djgpp/1.6/
ruby-1.6.8-1-i386-msdosdjgpp.tar.gz 711 KB 3/11/2003
ruby-1.6.8-20030727-i386-msdosdjgpp.tar.gz 733 KB 7/27/2003
ftp://ftp.ruby-lang.org/pub/ruby/binaries/djgpp/1.8/
ruby-1.8.0-i386-msdosdjgpp.tar.gz 1505 KB 8/4/2003
ruby-1.8.1-i386-msdosdjgpp.tar.gz 1906 KB 12/25/2003
ruby-1.8.2-i386-msdosdjgpp.tar.gz 3105 KB 1/27/2005
ruby-1.8.4-i386-msdosdjgpp.tar.gz 3663 KB 12/24/2005
Hmmm, not as huge as I remember. I guess it's all relative anyways.
P.S. I've found 16-bit DOS compiles on the web of Perl 4, Lua 4.0, and
Python 1.2. I'm not saying it majorly matters, but hey, if you really
want to be portable, you gotta support more than just 32-bit / 64-bit
*nix and the obligatory WinXP.
Okay, so that's all I know, esp. since I don't program in any of
these, just vaguely interested ! ;-)
- Raw text -