Re: dead-code stripping, is it possible?
Re: dead-code stripping, is it possible?
- Subject: Re: dead-code stripping, is it possible?
- From: Daniel Jogvan Nielsen <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 19:54:30 +0200
On Jun 2, 2004, at 19:04, Ken Turkowski wrote:
[snip]
Why the step backwards? All of the Macintosh linkers prior to OS X
stripped dead code on a function basis, not a module basis. It's not
like this is breaking new ground in compiler technology.
Reading this thread, I'm still not convinced that strip doesn't do what
you want. See man strip from the terminal
from the man pages:
When an executable is built with all its dependent dynamic shared
libraries, it is typically stripped with:
% strip -u -r executable
which saves all undefined symbols (usually defined in the
dynamic
shared libraries) and all global symbols defined in the
executable ref-
erenced by the dynamic libraries (as marked by the static link
editor
when the executable was built). This is the maximum level of
striping
for an executable that will still allow the program to run
correctly
with its libraries.
As I understand "symbols" then it means functions, objects and more,
and not just "modules"
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
/Daniel
_______________________________________________
xcode-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives: http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/xcode-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.