> then you are already using dynamic linking by definition "Well, technically..." I proposed using the dlopen() mechanism (or a custom linker) from a program

> then you are already using dynamic linking by definition "Well, technically..." I proposed using the dlopen() mechanism (or a custom linker) from a program that is itself statically linked. Because that's what the argument is about: statically linking the stuff you always need. Now, technically, that's dynamic linking. And because I'm linking the plugins dynamically, I might as well link everything dynamically, right? No, absolutely not. Because the latter gives me DLL hell, and rpaths, and library maintainers who think that changing LD_LIBRARY_PATH is perfectly sensible. The former doesn't. Not equivalent. Not at all. We're not talking about BGI or overlays or Go. We're talking about statically linked binaries calling the dynamic linker. You didn't actually know that was possible, did you?