Re: size of emacs executable after unicode merge

[Kenichi Handa]

In article <address@hidden>, Richard M Stallman <address@hidden> writes:

>     I guess the growth is not because of single change but
>     because of summing up of many small changes.

> Maybe that is true, or maybe one large change is responsible for .5
> meg (say).  This is an empirical question, and rather than guess,
> I am suggesting we find out the answer.

> If indeed this growth is due to many small changes then probably there
> is nothing to be done.  However, if one thing has eaten .5 meg, maybe
> a few hours of work can eliminate that, and it would be worth trying.

If one finds a reason of .5 meg eating, it may require just
a few hours to fix it.  But, to find that reason, I expect
one has to spend many hours.  At least, I've already spent
many hours, and have no idea how many more hours to take to
find one big reason (or to decide there's not such thing).

---
Kenichi Handa
address@hidden