Executable size

[Jesse Phillips]

On Fri, 09 May 2008 15:24:20 -0700, Neal Alexander wrote:

> Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>> Once D is natively using DLL/.so to store the runtime, executable sizes
>> should go way down.
>> 
>> -Steve
>> 
>> 
> Not many users are going to have the D runtime DLL present on their
> system. Even a lot of MSVC++ programs end up being distributed with
> local copies of the MSVCRT runtime just to be sure that people dont have
> broken versions in their system folder.
> 
> People need the option to statically or dynamically link the runtime
> based on their specific project needs. Statically linking the core
> runtime is best unless your project is split across multiple D
> executable files/DLLs.
> 
> In any case, D's runtime bloat is pretty much on par with OCaml and
> Haskell/GHC(SplitObjs).
> 
> 
> DWT seems pretty bloated, but its probably half the size of GTK haha.

On a linux system shared libraries are easy to keep correct (if packaged 
correctly). This is merely a flaw of the OS you're running. :) I couldn't 
resist.

Actually this is one area that makes it more difficult to adopt, packages 
relying on shared libraries conflicting with others that require a 
different version. Where most apps in windows will just carry the needed 
bloat to just make it work. In any case package managers have been a 
great help but don't fix it entirely.