On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 03:03:47PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 02:59:39PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > One interesting question here, is what is the cost of adding those debugging > > symbols ? > > Quoting from the OCaml manual (3.09) [1]: > > > Before the debugger can be used, the program must be compiled and > > linked with the -g option: all .cmo and .cma files that are part of > > the program should have been created with ocamlc -g, and they must be > > linked together with ocamlc -g. > > > > Compiling with -g entails no penalty on the running time of programs: > > object files and bytecode executable files are bigger and take longer > > to produce, but the executable files run at exactly the same speed as > > if they had been compiled without -g. > > So: no runtime penalty, only size increase. (Of course I'm speaking > module the increased time the interpreter will need to load a bigger > caml object, but that should be negligible most of the time).
So, this means there is no runtime cost, and only a size increase. And i suppose that if you link the binary without -g, then the debugging symbols are not included in the final binary, which would be the behaviour Julien mentioned. This would strongly hint at a behaviour of always including the debug symbols in libraries, and since the .cmo/.cma are in the -dev file anyway, this would not impose a size penalty on the normal user at all. Do we have an idea of how much the size increase is ? Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
