[fpc-devel] New -Xg option in the last 9778 revision

[Michael Van Canneyt]

On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Marc Weustink wrote:

> Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
> > 
> > On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Peter Vreman wrote:
> > 
> > > > > I suggested using Lazarus and the OP said he had great doubts because
> > > > > the
> > > > > size of the exe of his test program is 10 times the size of that
> > > > > compiled by
> > > > > Borland.
> > > > Anyone who writes such texts doesn't look further than his nose.
> > > > Experience shows they will just hit the next thing which makes Lazarus
> > > > "unusable". Don't expect such idiots to become Lazarus users.
> > > That is partly true. The problem is that setting -Xs doesn't help if there
> > > is also -g in the
> > > command line. So people think that the compiler strips the executable, but
> > > in fact the binary is
> > > unstripped.
> > >
> > > The easiest way to solve this is with a check in Lazarus. When the strip
> > > checkbox is checked a
> > > note shall be shown and asked to disable the debuginfo to make the option
> > > work.
> > >
> > > The real solution is what a lot of people already asked for. Multiple
> > > build modes like Visual C++
> > > also has.
> > 
> > I think this is indeed the best, and should be not so hard to implement; At
> > least the check would be already a hint to users.
> 
> :)
> 
> We thought about this some years ago. It is not as trivial as it seems.
> Initial problem was to present all possible options to the user.
> The tree based optiondialogs might help with this.

I may be naive, of course, but:

I think that the build mode should only (un)set a couple of options, and should
leave the rest of the options intact. What is so difficult about this ?

Michael.