Two things "come to mind" :
1. How much extra memory do you think will be required?
2. Once-upon-a-time, the Watcom people used to claim their
C compiler produced the most compact executable code. I
don't know if this was or remained true (since compilers are
always changing). I also don't know how easy it is to "port"
code from one C compiler to another. However, Watcom C
is being converted to open-source, so it should be possible
to obtain a free Watcom C compiler in the near future ( see
http://www.openwatcom.org/status.html ) - meanwhile,
perhaps someone here may know, and can comment on,
the efficiencies of different compilers. Toni Lopez (epppd),
for instance, says Borland's V3.1 compiler produces more
compact code than their latter C compilers ...
Regards,
Joe.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Polak [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, 18 October 2000 22:32
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: one urgent issue - epppd 0.7 or higher ?
>
> On Wed, 18 Oct 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > > Is there any optimized version of epppd, which consumes less DOS
> memory,
> > > which would be ready to be included in Arachne version 1.67 for DOS ?
> >
> > Not yet, it stopped working :/ I'll try and investigate it when I have
> > time (in two weeks or something like that).
>
> I am extremely interested in saving some DOS memory, because it looks like
> Arachne will require more memory once again, if it should support all new
> required features....
>
> --
> http://arachne.cz/
> (Arachne WWW browser for DOS+Linux / Webhosting / MP3streaming)
