From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Zack Weinberg <zack@codesourcery.com>
To: guerby@acm.org
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: The bloat sweepstakes...
Date: Sun, 07 Oct 2001 11:26:00 -0000
Message-id: <20011007112616.O9432@codesourcery.com>
References: <20011007102535.K9432@codesourcery.com> <200110071744.f97Hi3f16220@ulmo.localdomain>
X-SW-Source: 2001-10/msg00502.html

On Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 07:44:03PM +0200, guerby@acm.org wrote:
> > 1857.3  264.9   13.2   2321.9   4457.2  gnat1
> 
> I'm curious as from where this big BSS is coming from and I'm
> surprised BSS size is adding up into the final executable size, do I
> miss something (BSS does not need to be present in the executable
> since it's for unitialized data, right)?

BSS does not take up space in the on-disk file, but it does contribute
to the in-memory footprint of the compiler, so it seemed relevant.

Hmm... nm --size-sort suggests that most of it is lib__util__info_buffer,
weighing in at just over 2MB.  I think this is for dumping .ali files;
it's not clear to me why it is not using Text_IO.

zw