On Tue, 25 May 2010, Jean-Christophe Deschamps wrote:
> Hi,
> My context is embedding PCRE into the core of a Windows scripting
> language (AutoIt).
> Our developpers have PCRE working for years, but they didn't include
> UCP support. The debate is about the increased executable size.
> Since we have absolutely no use of the DFA engine, is it harmless to
> completely empty the pcre-dfa-exec() function and get rid of all other
> code in pcre_dfa_exec.c ? Keeping things this way would minimize
> changes to building process.
Sure. If you aren't using it, there's not reason to include it. I don't
understand how Windows works, but in other operating systems when you
link an application with a static library, only those functions that you
actually use get called in. Having pcre_exec() and pcre_dfa_exec() in
separate modules is supposed to ensure this. (In the very first releases
of PCRE, when there were no "optional" functions, all the code was in
one module. But it was a lot smaller!)
If you can't achieve the omission automatically, can you not just link
your application with the appropriate PCRE object files, but omitting
pcre_dfa_exec()? In a Unix environment I'd just include those .o files
that held the functions I wanted, bypassing the pre-linked library.
(This is the way it was done when PCRE was embedded in Exim.)
Anyway, however you do it, it should work.
Philip
--
Philip Hazel
