I've observed a discrepancy in bundle sizes between using your tool and building locally with swift build --product <Product> -c release. Locally, the bundle size measures around 10.2MB, whereas with your tool, it spikes to 16.5MB, primarily due to the Assets.car file, which occupies 15.5MB. I'm eager to delve into the reasons behind this gap and to investigate whether configuration adjustments can influence the size of the Assets.car file within the bundle.
Would tweaking the configuration settings potentially affect the bundle's output size? I'm considering forking your project to introduce a custom .xcconfig file for testing this hypothesis.
Moreover, could dividing the Assets.xcassets file into smaller .xcassets files help alleviate this issue?
I'm enthusiastic about exploring effective strategies to reduce the binary size, especially for users of my library. Any insights or suggestions on this front would be highly valued.
Greetings,
I've observed a discrepancy in bundle sizes between using your tool and building locally with
swift build --product <Product> -c release. Locally, the bundle size measures around 10.2MB, whereas with your tool, it spikes to 16.5MB, primarily due to theAssets.carfile, which occupies 15.5MB. I'm eager to delve into the reasons behind this gap and to investigate whether configuration adjustments can influence the size of theAssets.carfile within the bundle.Would tweaking the configuration settings potentially affect the bundle's output size? I'm considering forking your project to introduce a custom .xcconfig file for testing this hypothesis.
Moreover, could dividing the Assets.xcassets file into smaller .xcassets files help alleviate this issue?
I'm enthusiastic about exploring effective strategies to reduce the binary size, especially for users of my library. Any insights or suggestions on this front would be highly valued.
Thank you.