compiled code file size
I'm re-visiting the D language. I've compared the file sizes of 2 executables - 1 is compiled C code using gcc; the other is D code using dmd. helloWorld.d = helloWorld.exe = 146,972 bytes ex1hello.c = ex1-hello.exe = 5,661 bytes Why such a huge difference??? Duke
Re: compiled code file size
On Friday, 20-Sep-13 11:28 AM, captaindet wrote: On 2013-09-20 10:03, Duke Normandin wrote: I'm re-visiting the D language. I've compared the file sizes of 2 executables - 1 is compiled C code using gcc; the other is D code using dmd. helloWorld.d = helloWorld.exe = 146,972 bytes ex1hello.c = ex1-hello.exe = 5,661 bytes Why such a huge difference??? Duke maybe somehow related: i have a short program using GtkD. the exe is ~3MB if compiled using dmd and linked to pre-built GtkD.lib (16MB) ~2MB if compiled via bud/build following up on all imports directly, no linking to pre-built lib all compiler flags the same (-debug for exe, prebuilt lib is not debug but -O -inline -release). on windows. interesting
Re: compiled code file size
On Friday, 20-Sep-13 10:50 AM, Temtaime wrote: C/C++ applications also carries on its runtime(mingwm10, msvc's redist, for example). If compiled with static runtime, msvc's hello world application uses about 40 KB. +1
Re: compiled code file size
On Friday, 20-Sep-13 10:45 AM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: On Friday, 20 September 2013 at 16:20:34 UTC, Duke Normandin wrote: Why such a huge difference??? The D program carries its additional D runtime library code with it, whereas the C program only depends on libraries provided by the operating system, and thus it doesn't have to include it in the exe. Now that I know _why_ , is there a way to shave tons off those executables? Any optimization possible?
Re: compiled code file size
On Friday, 20-Sep-13 10:49 AM, Dicebot wrote: On Friday, 20 September 2013 at 16:20:34 UTC, Duke Normandin wrote: I'm re-visiting the D language. I've compared the file sizes of 2 executables - 1 is compiled C code using gcc; the other is D code using dmd. helloWorld.d = helloWorld.exe = 146,972 bytes ex1hello.c = ex1-hello.exe = 5,661 bytes Why such a huge difference??? Duke You are doing it wrong. ``` $ gcc hello.c; ls -lah a.out -rwxr-xr-x 1 dicebot users 4.9K Sep 20 18:47 a.out ``` vs ``` $ gcc -static hello.c; ls -lah a.out -rwxr-xr-x 1 dicebot users 717K Sep 20 18:48 a.out ``` (C standard library is dynamically linked by default) So actual relative difference is about 2x - quite big but not as huge. It mostly comes from additional D runtime stuff. I get the same executable size whether or not I use `-static' with cygwin/win7 ... Still tons smaller than the D executable though. Not good!! me young mucker :D
Re: compiled code file size
On Friday, 20-Sep-13 3:04 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote: On Fri, 20 Sep 2013 21:45:48 +0200 Temtaime temta...@gmail.com wrote: Software MUST running almost ANYWHERE and consumes minimal resources. For example i hate 3dsmax developers when on my game's map it uses several GB of ram amd freezes sometimes, when Blender uses only 500 MB and runs fast. The only reason for me for use 3dsmax is more friendly contoling. But this is another story... Some users which doesn't have modern PC will hate your app too i think. One should optimize ALL things which he can to optimize. I agree with what you're saying here, but the problem is we're looking at a difference of only a few hundred k. Heck, my primary PC was a 32-bit single-core right up until last year (and I still use it as a secondary system), and I didn't care one bit if a hello world was 1k or 1MB. How many real world programs are as trivial as a hello world? A few maybe, but not many. Certainly not enough to actually add up to anything significant, unless maybe you happen to be running on a 286 or such. If we were talking about real-world D programs taking tens/hundreds of MB more than they should, then that would be a problem. But they don't. We're just talking about a few hundred k for an *entire* program. I should have been a bit more clear!! It's the _relative_ size difference that bothers me!! One is almost 26 times larger than the other. If I'm to expect that same variance in a large to huge project, that I think that I'd me in a world of bullshine!!
Re: compiled code file size
On Friday, 20-Sep-13 2:20 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote: On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 11:26:18AM -0600, Duke Normandin wrote: On Friday, 20-Sep-13 10:45 AM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: On Friday, 20 September 2013 at 16:20:34 UTC, Duke Normandin wrote: Why such a huge difference??? The D program carries its additional D runtime library code with it, whereas the C program only depends on libraries provided by the operating system, and thus it doesn't have to include it in the exe. Now that I know _why_ , is there a way to shave tons off those executables? Any optimization possible? If you're on Linux: dmd -release -O myprogram.d strip myprogram upx myprogram I've seen this reduce a 50MB executable down to about 400k. YMMV. Keep in mind, though, that stripping basically deletes all debugging information from the executable (plus a bunch of other stuff -- you don't want to do this to an object file or a library, for example), so it's not something you want to do during development. And upx turns your executable into something that probably violates the ELF spec in many different ways, but resembles it closely enough that the kernel will still run it. File type recognizers like 'file' may fail to recognize the result as an executable afterwards. But it will still work. (That's how cool upx is, in case you don't already know that.) Thx! I'll have to do some experimenting ...
Re: compiled code file size
On Friday, 20-Sep-13 11:59 AM, JohnnyK wrote: On Friday, 20 September 2013 at 16:20:34 UTC, Duke Normandin wrote: I'm re-visiting the D language. I've compared the file sizes of 2 executables - 1 is compiled C code using gcc; the other is D code using dmd. helloWorld.d = helloWorld.exe = 146,972 bytes ex1hello.c = ex1-hello.exe = 5,661 bytes Why such a huge difference??? Duke That 140KB is called the CYA document. It is there so that when you the programmer screws up you don't look so bad in front of your boss. [quote]CYA document ...[/quote] sounds about right!!! :)
noob Q: declaring string variables
Back again... As an introductory tutorial, I'm now using: http://www.dsource.org/projects/tutorials/wiki/InitializingVariablesExample BTW, somebody fix that page - the `writefln' statements are missing the %d and %s. char[] password = sesame; didn't work on my MacOS X box. Why? [sidebar] Why is every D tutorial I've touched upon so far, been frigged up? This is NOT good advocacy, people! Bad advertising! Where is the good stuff hiding? L8r... -- duke
noob Q: array out-of-range
Hey...
Compiler is now working as expected! Thank's to a great catch by
Michel Fortin!
A little further down the tutorial D_ A Newbie-Oriented Tutorial,
there's this code:
[code]
import std.stdio;
void main()
{
int[] intArray;
intArray[0] = 42;
intArray[1] = 54;
intArray[2] = 91;
writefln(The lemgth of the intArray is %d.,
intArray.length);
}
[/code]
It compiles with no error or warning - AFAICT. However, it chokes
upon execution with:
dnormandin@ ~/programming/dmd2/code
01:40 pm arrays_in_d
core.exception.rangeer...@arrays_in_d(7): Range violation
I've read and re-read the tutorial content, but it's not jumping out
at me.
--
duke
Re: noob Q: array out-of-range
On Fri, 28 May 2010, bearophile wrote: Don: The array initially has length of zero. You need to write something like: intArray = new int[3]; or intArray.length = 3; before putting anything into it. In some languages (Perl? Maybe Lua and PHP) arrays auto-create empty slots as needed, but in many languages you need to tell the language that you want some empty slots before you can put values inside them (this stricter behaviour can probably catch some bugs, and allows to produce faster programs). Another way to add items to a D dynamic array like intArray is to append them at the end, the language runtime takes care of creating new slots as needed: int[] intArray; intArray ~= 1; intArray ~= 2; intArray ~= 3; Bye, bearophile @Don @bearophile Would you guys visit this URL real quick http://compsci.ca/v3/viewtopic.php?t=9518 This is the site that I'm using to learn D. If you scroll down 3-4 screens full, you'll come to the array topic. Is this tutorial outdated, wrong, or what, because it doesn't deem to sync with what you two fine fellows are telling me about creating dynamic arrays in the D-Language. TIA.. -- duke
Re: noob Q: array out-of-range
On Fri, 28 May 2010, bearophile wrote: Duke Normandin: This is the site that I'm using to learn D. If you scroll down 3-4 screens full, you'll come to the array topic. Is this tutorial outdated, wrong, or what, because it doesn't deem to sync with what you two fine fellows are telling me about creating dynamic arrays in the D-Language. TIA.. That part of that tutorial is not outdated, as far as I know it's just wrong. You can auto-create slots in associative arrays: int[int] aa; aa[0] = 1; aa[1] = 1; aa[2] = 1; Lua language uses associative arrays instead of arrays :-) Bye, bearophile So these two paragraphs in the tutorial are flat out wrong? [quote] You should note that I never specified how long the array should be. Instead I simply assigned values to various positions in the array and it just worked. This is an example of a dynamic array. It will grow to whatever size is required. I can determine the size of an array at any time by accessing the array's length property. The length property can also have a value assigned to it to resize the array. [/quote] Maybe the link for this tutorial at: http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FirstLanguage should be removed? -- duke
Re: noob Q: array out-of-range
On Sat, 29 May 2010, Simen kjaeraas wrote: Duke Normandin dukeofp...@ml1.net wrote: So these two paragraphs in the tutorial are flat out wrong? Absolutely. Then I'm done with _that_ site - can't trust it! Any chance that you could suggest a good beginner's D tutorial? -- duke
Re: Installing D on MacOS X Leopard box
On Tue, 25 May 2010, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Duke Normandin dukeofp...@ml1.net wrote in message
news:mailman.43.1274754397.24349.digitalmar...@puremagic.com...
Hello list...
I'm new to D, but not programming.
Welcome to D :)
Thank you!
I've followed the instructions on
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/dmd-osx.html
However, I keep on getting this error:
dnormandin@ ~/programming/dmd2/code
04:38 pm dmd -w firstApp.d
object.d: Error: module object is in file 'object.d' which cannot be
read
import path[0] = /etc/../../src/phobos
import path[1] = /etc/../../src/druntime/import
My guess is that dmd.conf is hosed somehow. I haven't edited the
default one - I've got it living in /etc/.
--
Duke
Looks like those instructions need to be fixed.
I'm glad that in my noobiness, I've been able to contribute
_something_ ;)
The file dmd.conf is expecting to live in the same directory as the DMD
executable (ie, {wherever you unzipped DMD}/osx/bin/ ). Deleting it out of
/etc/ should work. Or, if you really wanted, you could edit it (it's a
pretty simple text file) and change the paths to point to the right places
(Just replace %...@p% with {wherever you unzipped DMD}/osx/bin/)
Kinda thought so - but thought I'd ask first, _before_ I started
hacking and chopping.
BTW, these sorts of things are probably best asked over in
digitalmars.D.learn.
Thanks for the heads-up!
--
Duke
Re: Installing D on MacOS X Leopard box
On Tue, 25 May 2010, Michel Fortin wrote: On 2010-05-24 21:56:55 -0400, Duke Normandin dukeofp...@ml1.net said: Hello list... I'm new to D, but not programming. I've followed the instructions on http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/dmd-osx.html However, I keep on getting this error: dnormandin@ ~/programming/dmd2/code 04:38 pm dmd -w firstApp.d object.d: Error: module object is in file 'object.d' which cannot be read import path[0] = /etc/../../src/phobos import path[1] = /etc/../../src/druntime/import My guess is that dmd.conf is hosed somehow. I haven't edited the default one - I've got it living in /etc/. If you want to avoid the hassle of installing things manually, you can also use the D for Xcode installer which, in addition to installing a plugin for Xcode, downloads and installs the latest version of DMD 1 and 2. http://michelf.com/projects/d-for-xcode/ Have it already - thanks! However, _now_ I need a tutorial on how to use XCode, cuz I've been using emacs forever. I dabbled in ObjC for awhile, but never got anywhere with, because I spent most of my time keeping XCode happy. I don't want that to happen with my D experience. Do you know of a _real good_ XCode tutorial? -- Duke
Re: Installing D on MacOS X Leopard box
On Tue, 25 May 2010, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2010-05-25 03.56, Duke Normandin wrote: Hello list... I'm new to D, but not programming. I've followed the instructions on http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/dmd-osx.html However, I keep on getting this error: dnormandin@ ~/programming/dmd2/code 04:38 pm dmd -w firstApp.d object.d: Error: module object is in file 'object.d' which cannot be read import path[0] = /etc/../../src/phobos import path[1] = /etc/../../src/druntime/import My guess is that dmd.conf is hosed somehow. I haven't edited the default one - I've got it living in /etc/. You can just unzip the zip file, add executable permission on dmd/osx/bin/dmd and use it just where it is. dnormandin@ ~/programming/dmd2/osx/bin 07:53 am ./dmd ../../code/firstApp.d ld warning: in /usr/local/gnat/lib/libgcc_s.10.5.dylib, missing required architecture i386 in file ld warning: in /usr/local/gnat/lib/gcc/x86_64-apple-darwin9.6.0/4.3.4/libgcc.a, file is not of required architecture Now what? -- duke
Re: Installing D on MacOS X Leopard box
On Tue, 25 May 2010, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2010-05-25 15.55, Duke Normandin wrote: On Tue, 25 May 2010, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2010-05-25 03.56, Duke Normandin wrote: Hello list... I'm new to D, but not programming. I've followed the instructions on http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/dmd-osx.html However, I keep on getting this error: dnormandin@ ~/programming/dmd2/code 04:38 pm dmd -w firstApp.d object.d: Error: module object is in file 'object.d' which cannot be read import path[0] = /etc/../../src/phobos import path[1] = /etc/../../src/druntime/import My guess is that dmd.conf is hosed somehow. I haven't edited the default one - I've got it living in /etc/. You can just unzip the zip file, add executable permission on dmd/osx/bin/dmd and use it just where it is. dnormandin@ ~/programming/dmd2/osx/bin 07:53 am ./dmd ../../code/firstApp.d ld warning: in /usr/local/gnat/lib/libgcc_s.10.5.dylib, missing required architecture i386 in file ld warning: in /usr/local/gnat/lib/gcc/x86_64-apple-darwin9.6.0/4.3.4/libgcc.a, file is not of required architecture Now what? What have you done with your developer tools installation ?? It doesn't install anything in /usr/local by default. And by default all libraries are universal binaries so you shouldn't have that problem. It seems you have installed a new gcc version and you haven't build it the Apple way, that is building with support for universal builds. I simply followed the installation instructions on: http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/dmd-osx.html I also installed the XCode plugin for D. Could _that_ have hosed my install? -- duke
Re: Installing D on MacOS X Leopard box
On Tue, 25 May 2010, Michel Fortin wrote: On 2010-05-25 09:19:01 -0400, Duke Normandin dukeofp...@ml1.net said: On Tue, 25 May 2010, Michel Fortin wrote: If you want to avoid the hassle of installing things manually, you can also use the D for Xcode installer which, in addition to installing a plugin for Xcode, downloads and installs the latest version of DMD 1 and 2. http://michelf.com/projects/d-for-xcode/ Have it already - thanks! However, _now_ I need a tutorial on how to use XCode, cuz I've been using emacs forever. I dabbled in ObjC for awhile, but never got anywhere with, because I spent most of my time keeping XCode happy. I don't want that to happen with my D experience. Do you know of a _real good_ XCode tutorial? First, you don't *need* Xcode. The D for Xcode installer installs DMD so it is usable on the command line. You shouldn't have any problem using emacs, make, and whatever else you may like. If the 'dmd' command doesn't work after install, then it's probably something else outside of the DMD installation that is causing problems. Never had a problem with gcc and all the other tools before I installed D... Second, most Xcode tutorials focus on Cocoa and writing GUI applications. I'm not sure what you want to know, but personally what I find quite useful to be aware of is how the build system works. If that's what you want to learn, perhaps this is what you should read: http://developer.apple.com/mac/library/documentation/DeveloperTools/Conceptual/XcodeBuildSystem/ That URL is exactly what I've been looking for. Thanks. -- duke
Re: Installing D on MacOS X Leopard box
On Tue, 25 May 2010, Michel Fortin wrote: On 2010-05-25 10:30:44 -0400, Duke Normandin dukeofp...@ml1.net said: I simply followed the installation instructions on: http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/dmd-osx.html I also installed the XCode plugin for D. Could _that_ have hosed my install? Unlikely. The two errors you wrote about: dnormandin@ ~/programming/dmd2/osx/bin 07:53 am ./dmd ../../code/firstApp.d ld warning: in /usr/local/gnat/lib/libgcc_s.10.5.dylib, missing required architecture i386 in file ld warning: in /usr/local/gnat/lib/gcc/x86_64-apple-darwin9.6.0/4.3.4/libgcc.a, file is not of required architecture Noticed that both refer to files in /usr/local/gnat? GNAT, isn't this a GCC-based ADA compiler? My guess is that some of you environment variables have the /usr/local/gnat path before the standard system path, and gnat seems to include single-architecture (x86_64) copies of the GCC libraries. If that's the case, GCC running in 64 bit will work using these libraries, but since DMD is 32 bit it won't. Nice catch! You must be French! ;) (like me..) Have to go out of town for a few days, so I'll get back to this stuff at the end of the week. L8r.. -- duke
Installing D on MacOS X Leopard box
Hello list... I'm new to D, but not programming. I've followed the instructions on http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/dmd-osx.html However, I keep on getting this error: dnormandin@ ~/programming/dmd2/code 04:38 pm dmd -w firstApp.d object.d: Error: module object is in file 'object.d' which cannot be read import path[0] = /etc/../../src/phobos import path[1] = /etc/../../src/druntime/import My guess is that dmd.conf is hosed somehow. I haven't edited the default one - I've got it living in /etc/. -- Duke
