7 Dec
2004
7 Dec
'04
2:05 p.m.
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 12:43:27PM +0100, Lennart Augustsson wrote:
slightly slower than statically linked ones), but you still have the versioning issue. Yay! :) Dynamically linked libraries are slower than statically linked ones in just about every implementation I know of. I don't care.
From memory, an additional register is consumed when using dynamic
My understanding was that this was mostly limited to x86 platforms. libraries on that platform, and due to its already limited number of registers, that can mean a hit. AFAIK, these problems are negligible on many other platforms. This is just folk knowledge from a few years ago, so please correct me if I'm wrong. -- John