>> wonders what the hell kind of testing they did while managing to miss
>> this one...
>
> Yeah, the same was true of the Eiffel compiler when I bought it. Eiffel,
> the language for reliable software!

Heh, yeah. (Although... I thought it was actually Eiffel, the language 
for *reusable* software?)

> Anyway, chances are the person who tested it had already installed it
> and wound up running it against a different file. It's the sort of thing
> that happens when you've got a small shop instead of someone whose job
> it is to spend extra time to make sure it works on a vanilla machine.

Sounds about right.

>> Also: What about DLLs registered in the... registry?
>
> That's not DLLs. That's COM classes stored in DLLs.

Oh, right.

>> Apparently the compiler's dead code elimination works quite well.
>
> It's not hard if every function is in a separate .o blob.

Yeah, there's an option to do that. It tends to produce thousands of 
tiny object files, which sometimes freaks the linker out. (Apparently.) 
It also takes /forever/ to compile and link.

Even with this option not selected though, the program still ends up 
rather small. Certainly much, much smaller than 8MB. And I'm not sure how...

Post a reply to this message