W
waxinwaxout
I'm compiling the same set of c++ sources to both x86 (32 & 64) and to
mips32. For x86 I'm using gcc 4.1.2 and for mips I'm using gcc 3.4.6.
What I don't understand is why the mips binaries are consistently (and
significantly) larger than the x86 binaries.
Compiling to x86 without any selected optimization level results in a
binary of 961600 bytes while compiling to mips32 with -Os results in a
binary of 1414612 bytes. Both binaries have been stripped.
I don't understand why the mips32 binary is so much larger than x86.
They both come from the same sources. They both link against the same
libraries. Only the compiler version (and corresponding lib(c|c++))
are different. The mips32 build even has a more favourable switch (-
Os) than the x86 build, but the x86 build is still more than 30%
smaller than the mips32 binary.
Is there such a significant difference in (size) optimization between
gcc 3.4.6 and gcc 4.1.2, or is this difference between x86 and mips32
binaries 'normal' or is there another explanation?
Thanks,
Miyagi
mips32. For x86 I'm using gcc 4.1.2 and for mips I'm using gcc 3.4.6.
What I don't understand is why the mips binaries are consistently (and
significantly) larger than the x86 binaries.
Compiling to x86 without any selected optimization level results in a
binary of 961600 bytes while compiling to mips32 with -Os results in a
binary of 1414612 bytes. Both binaries have been stripped.
I don't understand why the mips32 binary is so much larger than x86.
They both come from the same sources. They both link against the same
libraries. Only the compiler version (and corresponding lib(c|c++))
are different. The mips32 build even has a more favourable switch (-
Os) than the x86 build, but the x86 build is still more than 30%
smaller than the mips32 binary.
Is there such a significant difference in (size) optimization between
gcc 3.4.6 and gcc 4.1.2, or is this difference between x86 and mips32
binaries 'normal' or is there another explanation?
Thanks,
Miyagi