Re:Sorry state of dynamic libraries on Linux
by waitwhat on Monday January 16, 2012 @05:27PM
(#3472885)
Is this the symbols-embedded-in-the-binary thing? Disc space is cheap, and they don't use extra RAM.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Sorry state of dynamic libraries on Linux
by psykotic on Monday January 16, 2012 @05:30PM
(#3472891)
The bloating can be extraordinary. When you're shipping libraries to discerning customers (programmers, not end users), perception really does matter.
A related issue which is more about the compiler than the operating system is that PDBs with Visual C++ on Windows are much more useful with highly optimized binaries than symbols (either embedded or separate) are with GCC-optimized binaries. This is understandable when you consider the different development cultures, but that doesn't make it any less of a problem for us. :)