Size problem

Mon Jan 13 01:23:00 GMT 2003

On 2003年1月12日, Erik Poupaert wrote:
> Really. No, thanks. That is no progress. Please, make it an optional option
> for the afficionados.

There's always -static.
> In my impression, shared objects (.so, .dll) are based on a deeply and
> widely spread misconception that such strategy would have advantages. It
> doesn't. In fact, none of the proposed advantages do ever materialize; on
> the contrary, they create the notorious dll hell.

You don't mention the advantages, so I'm not sure just what you're
objecting to, but the disk space savings and memory savings resulting
from shared libraries are definitely real.
Of course they don't help in every situation. Splitting one executable
into a small .exe + .dll doesn't make any sense. But if you application
consists of 20 executables which have 80% of their code in common, then
you really want shared libraries.
Fortunately, with gcj you can choose.
Jeff