From: J <not AT available2344 DOT com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: compiled EXE is bloated in C++
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 18:33:53 GMT
Organization: Fac. Wiskunde & Informatica, VU, Amsterdam
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <9tgs2h$lfo@cs.vu.nl>
References: <e1n8vtsgv3pft1k6ivb9206qlmqrdr3doi AT 4ax DOT com> <1858-Fri16Nov2001132654+0200-eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
NNTP-Posting-Host: keg.cs.vu.nl
User-Agent: tin/pre-1.4-19990927 ("Nine While Nine") (UNIX) (SunOS/5.8 (sun4u))
Cancel-Lock: sha1:mr/A3UJ4vYpBkZk5KWOAgYLT7Ok=
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> wrote:
> The FAQ was not yet updated for GCC 3.x.  The 3.x series implement a
> much larger subset of the standard C++ language, and you pay the price
> in executable size.  Standard C++ is a monstrously large language; if
> the 200K overhead bothers you, don't use C++.
What a blatant violation of the zero-overhead rule. Remember these?
"What you don't use, you don't pay for"
"There is no way of writing equivalent C code that runs faster or generates
smaller code"
-- Bjarne Stroustrup

This is exactly the stuff that is giving C++ a bad name.