Hi Reuben, > I think I assumed the only problem you had with libdl was the slow-down in > startup time, which, as I pointed out, was more than compensated by the > speedup at run-time, because currently: 'find_shared_library_fullname costs > "ca. 0.3ms on Linux, 3 ms on Cygwin 1.5, and 5 ms on Cygwin 1.7"'. > > Since you didn't reply to that point, I thought you accepted my argument.
I couldn't accept performance considerations without convincing measurements: "so perhaps it's not too bad to always use dladdr in this case on other OSes?" "(I am assuming that the current Linux method is cheaper than dladdr" Also, an additional link dependency means Makefile changes in the packages. While these are doable, they are backwards-incompatible and require an entry in the gnulib/NEWS file. > So, I'll re-do the patch along the lines you ask for. Specifically, that > means using the /proc-reading code for Linux. Yep. Thanks. > There's one other case that occurs to me: what about platforms where dladdr > is not in libc, but there is no other implementation of "costly > relocatable"? Specifically, on Hurd, Android, Haiku and HP-UX. One might want to look how dladdr() is implemented on the first three of these systems. On the other hand, GNU packages on these systems have relatively few users, therefore you may want to limit the effort you spend on these four platforms. Bruno
