this post was submitted on 04 Jul 2026
296 points (97.7% liked)

PC Master Race

21632 readers
891 users here now

A community for PC Master Race.

Rules:

  1. No bigotry: Including racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia. Code of Conduct.
  2. Be respectful. Everyone should feel welcome here.
  3. No NSFW content.
  4. No Ads / Spamming.
  5. Be thoughtful and helpful: especially when new beginners have questions.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ch00f@lemmy.world 22 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (2 children)

~~I suspect a 2.5kb application would probably load quickly and use little memory.~~

Edit: I'm an illiterate dumdum. Don't upvote.

[–] lowleveldata@programming.dev 20 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

One user reported it chewing through around 500MB of RAM on 64-bit Windows 7

It says this right in the article. Is reading the article too much to ask?

[–] tal@lemmy.today 24 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

They don't say the scenario where that's happening, though. Unless your editor supports large file editing, a mode where it doesn't load the whole file into memory, unless it has filesize restrictions that make it just fail, if you throw a large enough file at it, it's invariably going to use a bunch of memory.

$ dd if=/dev/zero of=out.bin bs=1M count=500
500+0 records in
500+0 records out
524288000 bytes (524 MB, 500 MiB) copied, 0.100949 s, 5.2 GB/s
$ vim out.bin

On my system, after it (slowly) finishes opening that file, vim's using 511MB RSS. I know that vim has some sort of large file editing support, though not how to use it.

On emacs, large file editing support is from the vlf package.

$ emacs
M-x vlf RET
out.bin RET

Emacs is using 75.3 MB RSS after opening that.

[–] ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org 9 points 12 hours ago

They do, in the linked GitHub issue:
https://github.com/PlummersSoftwareLLC/TinyRetroPad/issues/21

Apparently, that's just sitting idle.

By not optimizing for file size with Crinkler, the executable grows by a factor of 4 and RAM usage shrinks by a factor of 300. This build will probably be made available to people who value 500 MB RAM per running instance more than the 9 kiB of disk space saved (I assume that's anyone wanting to use it in practice).

[–] ch00f@lemmy.world 12 points 14 hours ago

Yes apparently. Apologies.

[–] CameronDev@programming.dev 10 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (4 children)

Size on disk doesn't correlate to memory usage or load time. You can get a very small on disk size by compression, or downloading the main executable at runtime.

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 1 points 1 hour ago

Thinking it doesn't correlate at all seems foolish. There is some correlation, it's just miniscule.

[–] Feyd@programming.dev 8 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (1 children)

The size of the main binary and all the libraries loaded does determine the starting point of the memory usage, but then doing things like loading files are going to also use memory and there are many strategies for optimizing for speed, memory usage, disk size that have tradeoffs between them. Anyway the point is that the size of the program itself isn't irrelevant even though it isn't the only factor in memory usage.

[–] CameronDev@programming.dev 2 points 10 hours ago

Even the linked libraries may not contribute anything, if they are already loaded and shared amongst other processes. There are so many factors and trade offs that you cant really make any assumptions based off just the executable size.

[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 7 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

The premise is probably if you can optimize the code to be small, you are probably also optimizing how it runs too. Rather then just bloat up everything

[–] CameronDev@programming.dev 3 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Once you start optimizing for one aspect, others become less important. In this case, they are doing a few hacks to get to 2.5kb, which do impact runtime performance. A few users report it using 500mb at runtime due to the compression :/

[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 hours ago

Well that sucks, although I assume that's way better than the AI bloated version that now comes with Windows.

[–] ch00f@lemmy.world 6 points 14 hours ago (3 children)

Sure. I wasn't thinking of something like .kkreiger. I assumed that a small simple text editor would use a similarly small amount of memory. Shocked it ballooned so big. Sorry can't read the article at the moment.

[–] ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org 2 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

Simply building without Crinkler compression changes the file size to 11 kiB and RAM usage to 1.7 MB. That's almost double what Microsoft's old Notepad (at a file size of 250-350 kiB, including an uncompressed multi-size RGBA icon of around 100 kiB and localization) uses but not bad, and probably the version most people will prefer for practical use.

[–] CameronDev@programming.dev 6 points 10 hours ago

It does some of the tricks that .kkreiger uses, including compressing the binary.

And at least according to a few reports, it uses 500MB of ram:

https://github.com/PlummersSoftwareLLC/TinyRetroPad/issues/21

[–] LeFrog@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

.kkrieger

Oh my god thanks for these memories

demoscene & 64K intro