[libxml-devel] Benchmark Dist?

[Sean Chittenden]

>> If you want to be considerate of the binary size, here's a q: what  
>> compresses to near 100% efficiency:
>> aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
>> Or:
>> Abcfefghijklnghajabhffgcggcffbhh
>
> Yup, no doubt.
>
> Actually, what really does take space is that we ship libxml2.dll  
> for all platforms and libxml_ruby.so (windows binary).  Should only  
> include them for the windows gem.


Gah!  Don't lead me astray like that!  Death to inferior development  
environments... or something like that.

mkdir /tmp/badness
cp -prv . /tmp/badness
find /tmp/badness -type f -print0 | xargs -0 gzip -9
find /tmp/badness -type f -print0 | xargs -0 du -k | sort -n

And Huston, we've got a culprit or two...

[snip]
8	./ext/libxml/ruby_xml_reader.c.gz
12	./benchmark/sock_entries.xml.gz
12	./doc/rdoc/classes/LibXML/XML/Node.html.gz
12	./doc/rdoc/classes/LibXML/XML/Reader.html.gz
12	./setup.rb.gz
48	./mingw/libxml_ruby.so.gz
80	./benchmark/hamlet.xml.gz
496	./mingw/libxml2-2.dll.gz
656	./mingw/libiconv-2.dll.gz

Hamelet's cool in my book and stays.  Windows can goto hell, however  
(who uses that OS anyway?  Mac?  Hello!).  Does the gem format  
preclude our ability to exercise the demons or are we forced to suck  
up and swallow a 400% increase in package size because of the Win32?  - 
sc

--
Sean Chittenden
sean at chittenden.org