Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Zedna

Size Of Autoitsc.bin In Beta 123 Grow Very Much

25 posts in this topic

#1 ·  Posted (edited)

Versions/Sizes:

123: 418 816

122: 396 800

...

110: 391 168

So in version 123 was made big jump in size, but there are no new functions, only few fixes (from 122).

So question is: Is it right or some problem?

If it's OK and it was only my misunderstanding of something then sorry...

Edited by Zedna

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



I correct 2 missing dot in message string and I get and update that lead to this increment.

Will be back in .124

Thanks Zedna :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same problem (as with version 125) is now with version 132.

Only some fixes and size grow very much.

But maybe Compilation done with VC8 instead of VC6. (by Jon) could be source of this ...

Versions/Sizes:

132: 444 416

131: 399 360

130: 399 360

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same problem (as with version 125) is now with version 132.

Only some fixes and size grow very much.

But maybe Compilation done with VC8 instead of VC6. (by Jon) could be source of this ...

Versions/Sizes:

132: 444 416

131: 399 360

130: 399 360

It look like the VC8 is bringing some more stuff. Compiling with VC6 will have done the same size as before.

But it is a Dev Team decision to go with VC8 :whistle::)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It look like the VC8 is bringing some more stuff. Compiling with VC6 will have done the same size as before.

But it is a Dev Team decision to go with VC8 :whistle::)

OK. I have no problem with this - if bigger size is not due to some "error".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The compiler we've used for releases to date is Visual C++ 6 but that's like 8+ years old now and is very "loose" with the C++ standard it's years since it was updated. Quite often we've had to write code in a bizarre way so that it will even compile in VC6. Most of the devs have been using Visual C++ 2003 and recently 2005 for dev work as it's a much more compliant compiler and nicer environment.

It's annoying about the size difference though. :grr:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Zedna

I am glad this community has people like you. I would never have known the size difference, or thought to check it.

Thanks for your dedication to the community.

JS


AutoIt Links

File-String Hash Plugin Updated! 04-02-2008 Plugins have been discontinued. I just found out.

ComputerGetInfo UDF's Updated! 11-23-2006

External Links

Vortex Revolutions Engineer / Inventor (Web, Desktop, and Mobile Applications, Hardware Gizmos, Consulting, and more)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The compiler we've used for releases to date is Visual C++ 6 but that's like 8+ years old now and is very "loose" with the C++ standard it's years since it was updated. Quite often we've had to write code in a bizarre way so that it will even compile in VC6. Most of the devs have been using Visual C++ 2003 and recently 2005 for dev work as it's a much more compliant compiler and nicer environment.

It's annoying about the size difference though. :grr:

Just one question,

If you compile the same code twice (make no changes) do you get the same size?

If not maybe there is a problem with the compiler, right?

RK


"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace"-Jimi Hendrix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just one question,

If you compile the same code twice (make no changes) do you get the same size?

If not maybe there is a problem with the compiler, right?

RK

The compiler's fine. It justs adds in lots more features (for example, inbuilt buffer overrun checking).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The size of the AutoIt bin file isn't too big. I think the script files ending up at about 40 kb compiled isn't too bad. It would be nice smaller, but this isn't bad yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AutoIt has always been compiled with the "favor small size" optimization on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same problem (as with version 3.1.1 beta 123,125,132) is now with version 3.2.1 beta 1,2.

Only some fixes and size grow very much.

Versions/Sizes:

3.2.1.12: 416 256

...

3.2.1.2: 433 664

3.2.1.1: 381 440

3.2.0.1: 382 464

So in version 3.2.1.2 is much bigger size

Jon said that new VC8 compiler was ued instead of old VC6 in version 3.1.1.132.

So if all 3.2.x versions would have bigger size I would say nothing here.

But why is bigger size in version 3.2.1.2?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More native support?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#18 ·  Posted (edited)

The change of the regex libary has added some size...

This was added in version 3.2.1.7 (and not in 3.2.1.2):

- Added: StringRegExp() and StringRegExpReplace() regular expression support (Perl compatible)

Edited by Zedna

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The size of 3.2.1.12 looks about right to me. It has the new regular expression engine which added some size. There's also some new code I added which increased AutoIt by around 5KB. So I think the size of 3.2.1.12 is about right when compared to 3.2.0.1 since we've knowing added some stuff to increase the size 25KB - 30KB. I see no significance in the size of 3.2.1.2 because that is 10 builds ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#20 ·  Posted (edited)

The size of 3.2.1.12 looks about right to me. It has the new regular expression engine which added some size. There's also some new code I added which increased AutoIt by around 5KB. So I think the size of 3.2.1.12 is about right when compared to 3.2.0.1 since we've knowing added some stuff to increase the size 25KB - 30KB. I see no significance in the size of 3.2.1.2 because that is 10 builds ago.

3.2.1.2: 433 664

3.2.1.1: 381 440

RegExp wasn't added in this version (3.2.1.2), so why more than 52KB in this version?

EDIT: OK I don't want to "tease" developers with such minor problem if they don't want to observe more details about that. So no problem.

Edited by Zedna

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0