Marco.Leise at gmx.de
Thu Feb 2 20:23:25 PST 2012
Am 03.02.2012, 04:42 Uhr, schrieb Adam D. Ruppe
<destructionator at gmail.com>:
> On Friday, 3 February 2012 at 03:40:07 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>> Dynamic linking is evil.
>> dynamic linking for a variety of reasons (saving memory being one of
> Smart operating systems don't even need it for this;
> they can do de-duplication of identical pages in both
> memory and on the drive.
Are you serious? I have seen a flag in Linux for hosting virtual machines,
but it must be an enormous overhead to check every executable page or
every executable file on the file system for duplicates. If this were for
free, it would be great, but the most spread OSes today and in the
foreseeable future wont have filesystems that do something like automatic
hardlinks of duplicate pages in executables. Both the file system and more
importantly executable formats aren't ready for this. Let's imagine the
library to link against against was Gtk. Would you want every binary
download on the internet to include libraries of that size?
The best we have for the job is dynamic linking. Personally I think it is
quite good, but you have to be careful as a library author to properly
version API differences.
More information about the Digitalmars-d