Look, fact is, if I changed the code and made the reported code size start not matching the file size, I would get complaints and in my opinion rightfully so.

It makes NO sense to say \"My code is 100 bytes unless you save it in a file and then its more than that because I used more than one line.\"

I had to decide how I was going to count the bytes for this script first thing when I started and I decided to do it this way because it just makes sense to have the code size match the size it will be in a file. Afterall, we do keep codes in files in the real world and in that real world a carriage return cost 2 bytes. I already made one exception to this by not counting completely blank lines in the code sizes.

We both know I could easily change this but the problem I have is that everybody else seems to like it as it is except for you.

And btw the third website you posted doesnt even exist.

Just because something is done differently doesnt make it wrong.

Perhaps I will add an option to select the way it does its count. MAybe make it so you could chose to count either by the actual character count like you wish or by file size like I have it and I could even add an option to count blank lines or not at that point. I\'ll think on that.