3 ms·
> Small standalone executables with a tree shaker How small? Are they static and hassle-free like Go/Rust binaries? > you can also make small standalone apps
by ducktective 4y ago
> Small standalone executables with a tree shaker
How small? Are they static and hassle-free like Go/Rust binaries?
> you can also make small standalone apps with SBCL
Same question. Also what's the downside? Slower run-time?
- vindarel 4y agoWith SBCL, the bare-bones image would be ±100MB, with core compression (a single flag to set in the .asd file) I get apps at ±25MB. The startup time of the latter is ±0.30s, the bigger executable is faster. My app would be a web app, with the webserver, templates, and many libraries. This binary also contains the Lisp debugger and compiler, which is useful to interact with it when it's running. In a latest version, SBCL switched to compression with zstd, which makes the compression process 4 times faster, decompression around 2 times, and it saves around +10% more space. On reddit (link below), a user speaks about LispWorks binaries of ±9MB.
- mark_l_watson 4y agoYes, compressed SBCL images load so fast that a few years ago I had a command line tool that I wrote using a compressed image. I think the load time for the tool was perhaps 100 milliseconds.