Big executable?

[so]

On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 13:41:26 +0300, retard <re at tard.com.invalid> wrote:

> Thu, 07 Oct 2010 13:27:23 +0300, so wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 11:39:41 +0300, Jacob Carlborg <doob at me.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2010-10-06 20:01, Walter Bright wrote:
>>>> so wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 10:40:11 +0300, Jacob Carlborg <doob at me.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> You are aware of that C is (almost always) dynamically linked with
>>>>>> the standard and runtime library but D (usually) is not? Using D1
>>>>>> and Tango on Mac OS X (which supports dynamic linking of the
>>>>>> standard library) gives an executable of the size 16 KB if I recall
>>>>>> correctly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Which is the next thing Walter will be working on after this 64bit
>>>>> business.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, making Phobos a shared library rather than statically linking it
>>>> will pretty much resolve this problem.
>>>
>>> Of course when Phobos is a dynamic library you would probably need to
>>> distributed it as well and then you will have same size again or even
>>> larger.
>>>
>>>
>> Eh?
>
> If the DMD/Phobos distribution doesn't provide compatible API/ABI between
> DMD/Phobos versions, the dynamic library has very little use since all
> libraries need to be distributed with the 3rd party application.

If we want to distribute a single shared library, until things get settled  
there is nothing we can do.
Also we are not talking about a single exec per project right? If this is  
what you mean, yes i agree it has no use,
but if in your project you got more than one executable or shared library  
it is a gain.

We all know how shared libraries work right?

-- 
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/