[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: PURESIZE increased (again)
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: PURESIZE increased (again) |
Date: |
Fri, 28 Apr 2006 08:42:42 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:
>> Cc: address@hidden
>> From: Ken Raeburn <address@hidden>
>> Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 18:24:55 -0400
>>
>> The byte and object counts *should* be the same (uh, unless the
>> pathnames to the elc files are stored somewhere but el file pathnames
>> are not).
>
> Even if this is true (which I don't think it is), how can a stored
> name explain 20KB of difference?
Maybe the principal data structure for a byte code passage takes a
different size because of alignment or data type issues?
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), (continued)
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Luc Teirlinck, 2006/04/27
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Ken Raeburn, 2006/04/27
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), David Kastrup, 2006/04/27
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Ken Raeburn, 2006/04/27
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Eli Zaretskii, 2006/04/28
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Eli Zaretskii, 2006/04/28
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again),
David Kastrup <=
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Ken Raeburn, 2006/04/28
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Eli Zaretskii, 2006/04/28
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Reiner Steib, 2006/04/27
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Eli Zaretskii, 2006/04/28
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Reiner Steib, 2006/04/28
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Andreas Schwab, 2006/04/28
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Eli Zaretskii, 2006/04/28
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Reiner Steib, 2006/04/28
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Eli Zaretskii, 2006/04/29
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Stefan Monnier, 2006/04/29