Big executable?

[retard]

Thu, 07 Oct 2010 14:08:17 +0300, so wrote:

> 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.

Yes, that's a fair point.

> 
> We all know how shared libraries work right?

Sorry for that. The answer was directed more towards the original poster.