From: Ullrich von Bassewitz (uz_at_musoftware.de)
Date: 2001-02-23 08:15:21
On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 10:42:33PM -0500, troy silvey wrote: > I havn't found that printf adds much to my compiled code. > In one my first sample programs (about 1.75k of code text) the > compiled program was barley 3k. I'm still working with that > first program, adding features and functions including printf > andgetchar. The code text has grown to 5.7k of code text while > the executable is 5.8k. Would scanf immediatly add 8k to the > compiled executable? This is why I said "Before the rewrite for version 2.6". The first version of printf was written completely in C, a hello world type program had a size of about 5K. After some optimizations to the C code, this dropped to somewhat more than 4K. For version 2.6, several functions (including printf) were rewritten in assembler, a "hello world" program is now about 2.5K. Since printf references lots of stuff that may get reused in larger programs (ctype, strlen, strlower, ultoa, ...) the overhead is usually lower for larger programs, since such programs tend to use these routines independent of printf. The 8K number for scanf is just an estimate for a first version written completely in C. It's based on the fact that scanf is even more complex than printf. But it's an estimate and it may be wrong. It may also be possible to get lower numbers by size optimizations or a rewrite in assembler, but I won't do that for the first version. It is usually easier to rewrite existing C code in assembler, than to write it in assembler from scratch. Regards Uz -- Ullrich von Bassewitz uz_at_musoftware.de ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo_at_musoftware.de with the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : 2001-12-14 22:05:39 CET