On Fri, 2018-02-02 at 10:03 +0000, Atila Neves via Digitalmars-d wrote: > […] > Whether it's .a or .so depends on the dependent package being > `staticLibrary` or `dynamicLibrary`. It's possible for a package > to be both if it has a configuration for each.
I think that is one of my points, the package source downloaded from the Dub repository should not be determining whether a .a or ,so is produced, it should be determined by the receiver of the downloaded package. > Personally I don't even see the point - just link all the .o > files. In a traditional build system static libraries might be > useful to specify that multiple targets link to this particular > binary blob. With dub there's only ever one binary anyway. But a static library is just a collection of .o files so I think it fits with "link all the .o together". It is clear that there is a move in the Go, Rust, D communities to rejecting the concept of shared library, and that 100MB executables are acceptable. > And at this point in time I think shared libraries are mostly a > mistake. The only time I use them is when I have to, as in when > developing Python extensions. The single biggest argument for shared libraries in D is GtkD. Linking an executable with a static GtkD library takes ages, and when developing you do a lot of linking. Fast turnaround, and thus reasonable development times, requires use of a shared library for GtkD. -- Russel. =========================================== Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
