<p dir="ltr">How much of this might be attributable to longer linker symbol names? Ghc 7.10 object code does have larger symbols! Is there a way to easily tabulate that?</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Apr 1, 2015 9:40 AM, "Jeremy" <<a href="mailto:voldermort@hotmail.com">voldermort@hotmail.com</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Roman Cheplyaka-2 wrote<br>
> I'm not denying (or confirming) your claim, but it would look more<br>
> legitimate if you compared the same version of Cabal compiled with<br>
> different versions of GHC.<br>
><br>
> At least some of this bloat could be because Cabal simply gained more<br>
> code.<br>
<br>
I was going to prove you wrong by identifying packages which have barely<br>
changed for 7.10 ... and found that those packages were a similar size to<br>
their 7.8 versions.<br>
<br>
However, the size increase in other packages is huge, and "simply gained<br>
more code" doesn't seem like an adequate explanation, with some package more<br>
than doubling.<br>
<br>
Here are the full results:<br>
<br>
7.8:<br>
<br>
34M Cabal-1.18.1.5<br>
3.8M array-0.5.0.0<br>
50M base-4.7.0.2<br>
52M bin<br>
368K bin-package-db-0.0.0.0<br>
2.7M binary-0.7.1.0<br>
5.4M bytestring-0.10.4.0<br>
9.4M containers-0.5.5.1<br>
196K deepseq-1.3.0.2<br>
608K directory-1.2.1.0<br>
740K filepath-1.3.0.2<br>
105M ghc-7.8.4<br>
2.7M ghc-prim-0.3.1.0<br>
8.7M haskeline-0.7.1.2<br>
3.4M hoopl-3.10.0.1<br>
1020K hpc-0.6.0.1<br>
556K integer-gmp-0.5.1.0<br>
680K pretty-1.1.1.1<br>
684K process-1.2.0.0<br>
1.6M rts-1.0<br>
13M template-haskell-2.9.0.0<br>
1.4M terminfo-0.4.0.0<br>
6.1M time-1.4.2<br>
4.4M transformers-0.3.0.0<br>
5.2M unix-2.7.0.1<br>
<br>
7.10:<br>
<br>
83M Cabal_HWT8QvVfJLn2ubvobpycJY<br>
3.7M array_FaHmcBFfuRM8kmZLEY8D5S<br>
52M base_I5BErHzyOm07EBNpKBEeUv<br>
56M bin<br>
2.9M binar_EKE3c9Lmxb3DQpU0fPtru6<br>
832K binpa_JNoexmBMuO8C771QaIy3YN<br>
5.7M bytes_6vj5EoliHgNHISHCVCb069<br>
11M conta_47ajk3tbda43DFWyeF3oHQ<br>
432K deeps_FpR4obOZALU1lutWnrBldi<br>
912K direc_3TcTyYedch32o1zTH2MR00<br>
796K filep_5HhyRonfEZoDO205Wm9E4h<br>
113M ghc_EMlWrQ42XY0BNVbSrKixqY<br>
2.9M ghcpr_8TmvWUcS1U1IKHT0levwg3<br>
8.9M haske_IlDhIe25uAn0WJY379Nu1M<br>
3.4M hoopl_JxODiSRz1e84NbH6nnZuUk<br>
1.1M hpc_CmUUQl5bURfBueJrdYfNs3<br>
1.3M integ_2aU3IZNMF9a7mQ0OzsZ0dS<br>
1.8M prett_7jIfj8VCGFf1WS0tIQ1XSZ<br>
764K proce_0hwN3CTKynhHQqQkChnSdH<br>
1.7M rts<br>
19M templ_BVMCZyLwIlfGfcqqzyUAI8<br>
1.4M termi_7qZwBlx3clR8sTBilJl253<br>
6.2M time_Hh2clZW6in4HpYHx5bLtb7<br>
7.3M trans_ALYlebOVzVI4kxbFX5SGhm<br>
5.4M unix_G4Yo1pNtYrk8nCq1cx8P9d<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
--<br>
View this message in context: <a href="http://haskell.1045720.n5.nabble.com/Binary-bloat-in-7-10-tp5768067p5768083.html" target="_blank">http://haskell.1045720.n5.nabble.com/Binary-bloat-in-7-10-tp5768067p5768083.html</a><br>
Sent from the Haskell - Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org">Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org</a><br>
<a href="http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users" target="_blank">http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users</a><br>
</blockquote></div>