Sign in Join

Live chat for Free Pascal, Lazarus, Delphi and every Pascal programmer.

Mailing lists / lazarus / 2016-08

VirtualTreeView 5.5 and binary size

4 messages · 3 people · –

Reply by email Subscribe to this list Your subscription

Read-only archive. Use j and k to move between messages.

Jürgen Hestermann

I just switched to VirtualTreeView 5.5. Here

http://forum.lazarus.freepascal.org/index.php?topic=32856.0

it says, that the binary would be smaller with version 5.5

but as I now used it, the opposite is the case:

With VirtualTreeView version 4.8 my program binary size was

4,792,851 bytes.

After switching to version 5.5 (together with LCLextension 0.6)

the binary increases to

5,962,259 bytes.

Is that as expected?

I now switched back to version 4.8 and the binary is back to the smaller size.

Together with the changes in code I would have to do and the lesser number

of supported OSs I don't see any benefit in using version 5.5.

Are there any?

Reply by email

Luiz Americo Pereira Camara
to Jürgen Hestermann

Sending again, in case not received in list due to recent issues

2016-08-14 6:32 GMT-03:00 Jürgen Hestermann :

Show quoted text 6 lines
I just switched to VirtualTreeView 5.5. Here http://forum.lazarus.freepascal.org/index.php?topic=32856.0 it says, that the binary would be smaller with version 5.5

The change in binary size compares with the previous LCL release so version 4.8.7 - LCL Release 4 should be smaller than version 4.8.7 - LCL Release 3

Since there's no previous 5.5 release for LCL, the comparison does not apply

Show quoted text 15 lines
but as I now used it, the opposite is the case: With VirtualTreeView version 4.8 my program binary size was 4,792,851 bytes. After switching to version 5.5 (together with LCLextension 0.6) the binary increases to 5,962,259 bytes. Is that as expected?

With the port of 5.x Delphi branch, comes the new features but also the increased size.

Anyway i think the increased size is too big. I will investigate to see if is related to changes in original code or something related to the port

Show quoted text 10 lines
I now switched back to version 4.8 and the binary is back to the smaller size. Together with the changes in code I would have to do and the lesser number of supported OSs I don't see any benefit in using version 5.5.

What OS does not work with 5.5?

Are there any?

You must refer to original code documentation, which is really lacking to describe the changes. You must dig at changes file https://github.com/Virtual-TreeView/Virtual-TreeView/blob/master/CHANGES.txt or in the google group: https://groups.google.com/forum/?nomobile=true#! searchin/virtual-treeview/released|sort:relevance

Luiz

2016-08-14 6:32 GMT-03:00 Jürgen Hestermann :

Show quoted text 37 lines
I just switched to VirtualTreeView 5.5. Here http://forum.lazarus.freepascal.org/index.php?topic=32856.0 it says, that the binary would be smaller with version 5.5 but as I now used it, the opposite is the case: With VirtualTreeView version 4.8 my program binary size was 4,792,851 bytes. After switching to version 5.5 (together with LCLextension 0.6) the binary increases to 5,962,259 bytes. Is that as expected? I now switched back to version 4.8 and the binary is back to the smaller size. Together with the changes in code I would have to do and the lesser number of supported OSs I don't see any benefit in using version 5.5. Are there any? -- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list http://lists.lazarus-ide.org/listinfo/lazarus

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lazarus-ide.org/pipermail/lazarus/attachments/20160821/675bc85a/attachment.html>

Reply by email

Graeme Geldenhuys
to Jürgen Hestermann: I just switched to VirtualTreeView 5.5. Here http://forum.lazarus.freepascal.org/index.php…
Jürgen Hestermann wrote
Is that as expected?

I’m not using VirtualTreeview myself, but as someone that works on multiple large frameworks, I could make a personal observation. A jump from v4.8 to v5.5 seems like a major jump (a major version change, and multiple minor version increases), and if lots of new functionality was added (and no major refactoring was done) it seems logical that the binary size increases. More code equals larger binaries. If the functionality added is worth the 1.2MB binary increase? That’s for you to decide. If you are happy with the workings of v4.8 and require a smaller binary size, then simply stay with v4.8.

Regards,
Graeme

fpGUI Toolkit - a cross-platform GUI toolkit using Free Pascal http://fpgui.sourceforge.net/ My public PGP key: http://tinyurl.com/graeme-pgp

Reply by email

Jürgen Hestermann
to Luiz Americo Pereira Camara: Sending again, in case not received in list due to recent issues 2016-08-14 6:32…
Luiz Americo Pereira Camara wrote 7 lines
Sending again, in case not received in list due to recent issues 2016-08-14 6:32 GMT-03:00 Jürgen Hestermann : I just switched to VirtualTreeView 5.5. Here http://forum.lazarus.freepascal.org/index.php?topic=32856.0 it says, that the binary would be smaller with version 5.5 The change in binary size compares with the previous LCL release so version 4.8.7 - LCL Release 4 should be smaller than version 4.8.7 - LCL Release 3 Since there's no previous 5.5 release for LCL, the comparison does not apply

Okay, this was not clear from the simple sentence: Major changes:
- Uses native resources instead of Lazarus resources: smaller binary

What OS does not work with 5.5?

I don't know about special issues with certain OSes. I am just under the impression that 4.8.7 is
tested (successfully) on more OSes than 5.5
so issues *may* occur with 5.5.
Therefore I would be on the safe side when using 4.8.7 (especially as I don't need any of the changes in 5.5 as far as I see)

Reply by email