Re: [Freesurfer] Building from source #2 -- dynamic binding

2016-02-21 Thread Yaroslav Halchenko
On Sun, 21 Feb 2016, R Edgar wrote: > On 21 February 2016 at 22:33, wrote: > > Intolerable differences have not been found. They are always minor <%5 and > > their source can come from several places. For example, different > > compilers (or even different

Re: [Freesurfer] Building from source #2 -- dynamic binding

2016-02-21 Thread Yaroslav Halchenko
On Sun, 21 Feb 2016, zkauf...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu wrote: > This topic gets brought up occasionally and their are valid arguments > to both sides. One reason we have hesitated to use dynamic libs is the > partly due to freesurfers long release cycle (all subjects that are > part of a study need

Re: [Freesurfer] Building from source #2 -- dynamic binding

2016-02-21 Thread R Edgar
On 21 February 2016 at 22:33, wrote: > Intolerable differences have not been found. They are always minor <%5 and > their source can come from several places. For example, different > compilers (or even different versions of the same compiler) can have > different

Re: [Freesurfer] Building from source #2 -- dynamic binding

2016-02-21 Thread zkaufman
Intolerable differences have not been found. They are always minor <%5 and their source can come from several places. For example, different compilers (or even different versions of the same compiler) can have different sorting behavior when presented with objects that have equivalent comparators.

Re: [Freesurfer] Building from source #2 -- dynamic binding

2016-02-21 Thread zkaufman
This topic gets brought up occasionally and their are valid arguments to both sides. One reason we have hesitated to use dynamic libs is the partly due to freesurfers long release cycle (all subjects that are part of a study need to be performed all on the same version). This long release cycle

Re: [Freesurfer] Building from source #2 -- dynamic binding

2016-02-20 Thread R Edgar
On 20 February 2016 at 17:28, Bruce Fischl wrote: > hmmm, the only thing that worries me about dynamic linking is that it > will add variability to the outputs. Zeke has spent endless amounts of time > tracking down e.g. mac vs. pc differences in math libs and such.

Re: [Freesurfer] Building from source #2 -- dynamic binding

2016-02-20 Thread Yaroslav Halchenko
On Sat, 20 Feb 2016, Bruce Fischl wrote: > hmmm, the only thing that worries me about dynamic linking is that it > will add variability to the outputs. Zeke has spent endless amounts of time > tracking down e.g. mac vs. pc differences in math libs and such. Won't > dynamic linking just make

Re: [Freesurfer] Building from source #2 -- dynamic binding

2016-02-20 Thread Bruce Fischl
hmmm, the only thing that worries me about dynamic linking is that it will add variability to the outputs. Zeke has spent endless amounts of time tracking down e.g. mac vs. pc differences in math libs and such. Won't dynamic linking just make that a much more prevalent problem? Bruce On Sat,