Re: BDS2006 exe sizes
- From: erewhon@xxxxxxxxxx (J French)
- Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 10:05:48 +0000 (UTC)
On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 10:28:02 +0100, "Maarten Wiltink"
<maarten@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
<snip>
By and large correct. The JIT compiler is mandatory and partly not
really JIT anymore, it preprocesses the entire RTL when you install
the framework. (It took _forever_ to install .Net 2.0 on a K6-II 350.)
Interesting
- that reminds me of the acid test for a UNIX port
- make the fixes
- recompile the compiler
- then recompile the entire system
Not a bad design, especially for portability, but not the original
Delphi concept.
Tell me again. What does the P in P-code stand for?
Pseudo
- if you're thinking 'P'ascal, I rather suspect it is not that
- semi compiled stuff has been around a very long time
Digressing, one thing I found when I first started using a compiler,
is that one goes to great lengths to write an 'interpreter' in it.
Not necessarily a scripting language, but something that works on
parameter files.
.
- References:
- BDS2006 exe sizes
- From: Ian
- Re: BDS2006 exe sizes
- From: Uffe Kousgaard
- Re: BDS2006 exe sizes
- From: Ian
- Re: BDS2006 exe sizes
- From: Uffe Kousgaard
- Re: BDS2006 exe sizes
- From: Ian
- Re: BDS2006 exe sizes
- From: Hans-Peter Diettrich
- Re: BDS2006 exe sizes
- From: J French
- Re: BDS2006 exe sizes
- From: Maarten Wiltink
- BDS2006 exe sizes
- Prev by Date: Re: BDS2006 exe sizes
- Next by Date: Re: BDS2006 exe sizes
- Previous by thread: Re: BDS2006 exe sizes
- Next by thread: Re: BDS2006 exe sizes
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|