From: Kbwms AT aol DOT com
Message-ID: <0.b038c163.25532ba1@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 13:34:09 EST
Subject: Re: -g vs -s
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 26
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

In a message dated 11/4/99 1:09:35 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
neldredge AT hmc DOT edu writes:

> But in any case, I don't think this is worth it.  I've never been a fan
>  of changing legitimate behavior for the sake of people who won't RTFM,
>  and this is a fairly well ingrained behavior of GCC-- unless you specify
>  otherwise, the link stage just puts all the object files together.  For
>  instance, -g is documented as a compilation option and not a link
>  option, so our behavior would then not match the GCC manual, leading to
>  further confusion.  Besides, for anyone who has preconceptions of
>  executable size (most likely from Borland or similar), 30K for Hello
>  World will seem just as excessive as 60K, so I don't think it will
>  forestall that many questions.

I can't remember when I've witnessed a point argued any better or more
forcefully.  Well done!

K.B. Williams