Conversation
Notices
-
@deprecated_ii @billiam dynamic linking, if it hadn't been needed to keep disk/memory usage smol, would prob have been invented anyway
e.g., update openssl once instead every application that uses it
just kind of a function of how things got developed using anti-NIH principles
now that we make everything "just do this one thing and nothing else" static linking makes sense again
-
@JoshuaSlocum @billiam I'm sure it would have, but it's long past time for dynamic linking to get the old yeller treatment
aside from the fact that package management is a nightmare that nobody is good at, the security argument goes in the other direction too. supply chain attacks enable compromising absolutely everything instead of only new builds
however I don't care very much about dynamic linking because I think the OS paradigm we use should also be put down. hardware is not expensive anymore but the mantra is still "maximize the use of hardware". why do I care if a $5 hardware slice is only used for email and sits idle 23 hours 55 minutes a day? it was $5
-
@deprecated_ii @JoshuaSlocum @billiam funny that I actually preferred dynamic-linking for C/C++ package management (MSYS2) because it lifts the burden of building the libraries from source. The one time that dynamic-linking make sense is when linking with a LGPL-licensed library, which the license prohibits static-linking iirc.
-
@deprecated_ii what are some of the dumb things that are clung to?
-
@billiam dynamic linking
-
we cling to the dumb shit programmers had to do because of technical limitations 40 years ago but throw out all the good stuff they were doing because academics came up with cool names like EXTREME PROGRAMMING and AGILE
JoshuaSlocum
d
🛡 ⚔️ McCreeaboo ⚔️ 🛡
billiam :4chan:
All ０７６萌ＳＮＳ content and data are available under the