ghc image size

[Mike Gunter]

Why is executable size a barrier?  1.64 megabytes (that's the size of
the executable I built with GHC most recently) of disk space costs less
than half a cent.  The total cost of the storage will be higher
(backup, installing the drive, etc.) but I don't think it will be
important.

Are there other reasons that size matters?

        mike


> I just recently starting to use the ghc compiler and am astonished by the
> size of the executables. Out of interest, why are they so large? Is there
> any work in progress to make the resulting executable/object somewhat more
> "normal" in size?
>
> I read in the Haskell mailing list archives discussions relating to reducing
> the barriers to broader acceptance of functional programming by the general
> programming community (in particular Haskell) - I would regard this as one
> of these barriers.