[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: size increase for CVS emacs vs 21.3
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: size increase for CVS emacs vs 21.3 |
Date: |
Wed, 15 Sep 2004 10:08:32 +0300 |
> From: Dan Nicolaescu <address@hidden>
> Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 11:23:07 -0700
>
> It turns out that contrary to what I previously said, the size of
> "pure" can be decreased a lot, to 994000
> bytes (at least on i686-pc-linux-gnu).
Something to consider right before going into pretest, I guess.
During development, having too few extra bytes in pure[] is a nuisance
because each time you enlarge the size of the preloaded Lisp code, you
need to enlarge PURESIZE.
- size increase for CVS emacs vs 21.3, Dan Nicolaescu, 2004/09/10
- Re: size increase for CVS emacs vs 21.3, Richard Stallman, 2004/09/13
- Re: size increase for CVS emacs vs 21.3, Dan Nicolaescu, 2004/09/14
- Re: size increase for CVS emacs vs 21.3, Kim F. Storm, 2004/09/14
- Re: size increase for CVS emacs vs 21.3, Andreas Schwab, 2004/09/14
- Re: size increase for CVS emacs vs 21.3, Stefan Monnier, 2004/09/14
- Re: size increase for CVS emacs vs 21.3, Andreas Schwab, 2004/09/14
- Re: size increase for CVS emacs vs 21.3, Kim F. Storm, 2004/09/14
- Re: size increase for CVS emacs vs 21.3, Richard Stallman, 2004/09/15
- Re: size increase for CVS emacs vs 21.3, Dan Nicolaescu, 2004/09/14
- Re: size increase for CVS emacs vs 21.3,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: size increase for CVS emacs vs 21.3, Richard Stallman, 2004/09/15