Re: [gtkmm] gtkmm is really big

[Murray Cumming <murrayc murrayc com>]

On Fri, 2004-02-13 at 20:30, Murray Cumming wrote:
> You will find more numbers in the archive:
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=gtkmm&m=106960351701653&w=2
> 
> I'm sure this can be improved, but it must be done by someone who needs
> it.
> 
> On Fri, 2004-02-13 at 13:50, Seth Moore wrote:
> > That's all true, but we're constrained more heavily by code size than by
> > memory.  It was my mistake for not qualifying more heavily, but that 32 MB I
> > meantioned earlier is for ROM, not RAM.
> > 
> > We've decided to stick with the native gtk+ C interface.  Being a C++ bigot,
> > I'd prefer to use a gtkmm, but it should be no problem to use plain old gtk+.
> >  We're able to take the ~300k hit on the stdc++ libraries and such, but not
> > the extra ~2MB that gtkmm adds on top of that.

Also, if you have so little ROM, I would expect you to use some kind of
tool that would remove the implementation of unused functions. Or maybe
static-linking should do this already.

For instance, most methods in atkmm, pangomm, and gdkmm, and many in
gtkmm, are never called by most applications, but exist because an
application might want to use them one day.

-- 
Murray Cumming
www.murrayc.com
murrayc murrayc com