Agree - there's just to much non-repeatability with shared libaries; just where is LD_LIBRARY_PATH pointing in which shell...
Static linking - Reassuringly Expensive On 10/05/07, Andrew Stitcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, 2007-05-10 at 09:37 -0400, Alan Conway wrote: > The only thing boost lacks is a shared-library plugin framework. I used > to think this was a great thing but I fear I was blinded by technology. > On reflection a collection of separate executables that you can directly > run individually is actually *better* that a collection of shared libs > that you can run individually using the DllPluginTester tool! I'm very glad you said that - recently John Lakos said (on a presentation at ACCU 2007) that you should have a standalone test executable per component (component has a specific meaning in his scheme of things). One of the reasons he cited was that the executable would let you know the precise set of link time dependencies of the component. This is important in his ideas as keeping control of component dependencies is paramount. Andrew
