[TUHS] screen editors

[Brantley Coile]

No point here, other than showing the size of sam in its native Plan 9 habitat.

ehg% size /bin/sam /bin/aux/samterm
 95,514t +  8,764d + 75,868b = 180,146	/bin/sam
145,093t + 28,708d + 59,508b = 233,309	/bin/aux/samterm

The size gives me a better idea of the code complexity. For completeness, here's the size of vi on my Mac.

bwc-downtown:~ bwc$ size /usr/bin/vi
__TEXT		__DATA	__OBJC	others		dec		hex
1,585,152	163,840	0	4,295,012,352	4,296,761,344	1001b6000
	
Good thing the Mac has shared libraries? (Commas added for clarity)

Again, no point, other than a data point.

Brantley

> On Jan 7, 2020, at 2:57 PM, Doug McIlroy <doug at cs.dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> 
> McIlroy:
>> [vi] was so excesssive right from the start that I refused to use it.
>> Sam was the first screen editor that I deemed worthwhile, and I
>> still use it today.
> 
> Paulsen:
>> my sam build is more than 2 times bigger than Gunnar Ritter's vi
>> (or Steve Kirkendall's elvis) and even bigger than Bram Moolenaar's vim.
> 
> % wc -c /bin/vi bin/sam bin/samterm
> 1706152 /bin/vi
> 112208 bin/sam
> 153624 bin/samterm
> These mumbers are from Red Hat Linux.
> The 6:1 discrepancy is understated because
> vi is stripped and the sam files are not.
> All are 64-bit, dynamically linked.