| Anonymous | Login | Signup for a new account | 11-10-2008 10:47 PST |
| Main | My View | View Issues | Change Log | Docs |
| Viewing Issue Simple Details [ Jump to Notes ] | [ View Advanced ] [ Issue History ] [ Print ] | ||||||||
| ID | Category | Severity | Reproducibility | Date Submitted | Last Update | ||||
| 0000343 | [uClibc++] Other | minor | always | 07-13-05 14:35 | 08-02-05 20:13 | ||||
| Reporter | tommi | View Status | public | ||||||
| Assigned To | gkajmowi | ||||||||
| Priority | normal | Resolution | fixed | ||||||
| Status | closed | Product Version | 0.1.11 | ||||||
| Summary | 0000343: empty destructor in stdexcept increase codesize | ||||||||
| Description |
as discussed in issue 0000340 there is a difference in codesize, depending how to define a virtual empty destructor. My investigations got these numbers on my system: libuClibc++ with explicit virtual destructors in cpp-file results in a library size of 176432 bytes. With defined inline in include/stdexcept the library is 174256 bytes (about 2k smaller). The codesize of a compiled program is exactly the same. This patch moves destructors from cpp- to header-files. Another test tells me, that it is no difference if I define a virtual empty destructor in the header or define none at all (in which case a default destructor is generated). It is just a matter of taste, if you define it or let the compiler do the work for you. |
||||||||
| Additional Information | |||||||||
| Attached Files |
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
Notes |
|
|
(0000320) gkajmowi 07-20-05 12:00 |
In SVN. Thanks for doing the testing. You have reduced the size of the library noticeably. |
| Copyright © 2000 - 2006 Mantis Group |