Michael Van Canneyt <mich...@freepascal.org> schrieb am Di., 16. Juli 2019, 16:31:
> > > On Tue, 16 Jul 2019, Ben Grasset wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 5:28 AM Sven Barth via fpc-devel < > > fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org> wrote: > > > >> The output will then be two different addresses, thus showing that the > >> code had been generated twice. > >> > >> However the compiler/linker is good at leaving out unused code and in > this > >> case only the two Assign specializations are kept as their addresses are > >> taken, everything else is discarded. If you'd change one of the two to > >> another non-virtual method then Assign of the one specialization and the > >> other method of the other specialization would be kept. > >> > >> If you use virtual methods inside generics then things are less likely > to > >> be removed. > >> > > > > Ah, I understand now. > > > > I guess my point overall was that, in my experience at least, while > there's > > indeed probably room for improvement in that area via something like WPO > / > > COMDAT support / e.t.c. as you'd suggested, the overall effect of > generics > > in FPC on binary size is not *unreasonable*. > > > > I use Delphi only semi-regularly, but it does seem to be somewhat more of > > an actual issue there (as frankly binary size in recent Delphis is in > > general, with generics or not, when compared to FPC.) > > I suspect this is also in part due to the liberal and generous use of > extended RTTI. > Correct. We'll have to see how that works out with FPC... Regards, Sven >
_______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org https://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
