Re: .Net applications, not optimized for CPU at all?

Eric Grange wrote:
> then you already saved disk space vs native win 32 apps with .net apps

How so? I mean apart from 'hello world' class of applications (which are comparable to the size of Delphi when using BPLs),

I don't want to prove the opposite, and yes, I know the table holds the size of a "hello world" application. (I need only the first 2 entries).


Delphi 2005 VCL.NET 1239 KB
Delphi 2005 VCL.NET (VCL referenced): 8 KB
Delphi 2005 VCL native 365 KB
Delphi 2005 WinForm 23 KB
Delphi 2005 -"- packages 15 KB
C#2.0 16 KB


Not representative, but as you see from the table above I can compile the .NET sample to 1239 KB or to 8 KB by referencing the VCL.NET dll or not.

And the version without BPLs is 365 KB.
So if you distribute 50 Delphi applications you would have to install the VCL BPLS to a central system directory to save space.
The .NET framework will be installed to a central system directory.


the .Net EXE and DLL didn't strike me as being particularly lean at all compared to native versions.

Regarding native applications I have a nice example:

C++ application: (same Source code)

Compiler#1: 1 MB
Compiler#2: 3 MB

So even there are very large differences.

The .Net DLLs especially are huge, things like Tao.OpenGL, at 2 MB+, is

Are that VCL applications compiled to .NET ? If so why should they be significantly smaller. And if so is the VCL.NET package shipped or linked directly into the executable / dll.

about 10 times the size of the equivalent Delphi *DCU*, and even

10 times is quite a large overhead, which cannot be explained only by the additional meta data, which is shipped with an assembly. Only if the VCL.NET or other code is not referenced, but compiled into it ?

[...] Eric

But why are we comparing executable sizes ?
IMHO IL code should be always a bit larger or comparable in size to the equivalent native assembly code.
But that's the problem: what is equivalent code ?

One the uses VCL code and is compiled to both native and .NET or one that uses either VCL or .NET framework (WinForms etc.) ?

IMHO we are comparing apples with oranges in this thread.

Andre
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Chrome - competition for Borland?
    ... Because comparing WinForms directly with the VCL is like comparing the ... > end up with a 3rd party component, ... I *always* use 3rd party components in Delphi. ... The TreeView I use is provided by Mike Lischke - not Borland. ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)
  • Re: Unbiased view of Delphi 2007...
    ... comparing to earlier versions of Delphi, ... all other Delphi versions were "rock solid". ... it would autorun and I'd have the install done in minutes. ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)
  • Re: I think Delphi 9 Win32 could be huge success...
    ... When compared with Delphi ... Your argument of comparing J2EE to .NET is tangential and not relevant to ... it would appear that ASP.NET is the "killer app" for .NET in ... So Asp.Net seems like a very good toolset for web ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)
  • Re: Delph Superior to New D Language
    ... There is nothing wrong with discussing other languages, seeing improvements ... and comparing them to Delphi. ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)
  • Re: What Delphi users really want (other than bugfixes)
    ... Delphi for .Net or VB.Net or C#. ... But comparing ... "A man is likely to mind his own business when it is worth minding, ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)