Re: [Nano-devel] definition of filestruct with ENABLE_MULTIBUFFER

[Chris Allegretta]

On Sun, Mar 31, 2002 at 05:53:05PM -0800, David Lawrence Ramsey wrote:
> Also, there's the issue of binary size.  From the February
> '02 mailing list archives:
> 
> [Nano-devel] nano and binary files 
> Chris Allegretta address@hidden 
> Mon, 18 Feb 2002 12:36:26 -0500 
> 
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 09:28:14AM -0800, David Lawrence Ramsey wrote:
> > 
> > I'll at least make an attempt at this, so you can see what I
> > have in mind.
> 
> Sounds good.  I am genuinely interested in what this would take, but I
> admit I may not want to accept it into the tree depending on the code
> size increase.  Once we get these recent patches reconciled, I need to
> take a look at binary size again.

Yep. I should make my intentions more clear before you guys go killing
yourselves adding things :).  Using debian testing as my baseline, the
'default' nano binary size should not be over 100K.  I think even with
multibuffer and color enabled right now it's about 98K, which is not
bad. With all the bells ans whistles nano should probably not be over
150K, as I think that's what Pico's binary size is on this system. 
Nano-tiny has to stay about <= 40K or it will probably be useless for
bootdisks.

I haven't heard anything so far on the list that screams feature creep,
but I think as soon as we make the .rc file robust, adding for variable
color definition files, and the rebindable keys that everyone and their
mother seems to want, we're definitely going to be pushing it.

Chris A
-- 
Chris Allegretta        http://www.asty.org

"Share and Enjoy" - Douglas Adams, 1952 - 2001