On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 9:46 PM, Thiago Macieira <[email protected]>wrote:
> On quinta-feira, 1 de agosto de 2013 20:21:23, Laszlo Papp wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 7:59 PM, Thiago Macieira > > > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > On quinta-feira, 1 de agosto de 2013 19:38:12, Laszlo Papp wrote: > > > > 3 > > > > > > This discussion is going off on a tangent but... > > > > > > you do realise that there's an overhead associated with dynamic > libraries, > > > right? The code runs slightly slower due to indirect access to functons > > > and > > > data, and there's a start-time impact due to the relocation and dynamic > > > linking. Even if you use prelink, the problems do not go away > completely. > > > > Startup time is no concern in our product. > > I did mention runtime performance impact too due to -fPIC. All > architectures > (except IA-64[*]) are affected. Please take the time to investigate a > single > statically-linked executable. > Actually, we started off by static linkage for libraries before switching to dynamic, but there were no significant issues in our system. As I already wrote, flash is more of a concern. Of course, if qt and scene graph was outstandingly use (waste, imo) the memory, that would be a blocker, too, but that is an entirely different question to flash.
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
