4 ms·
> As someone born in the 21st century, I've always found this to be a weird distinction. Why? I mean, what use do you see in executing a shared library? It sou
by arinlen 4y ago
> As someone born in the 21st century, I've always found this to be a weird distinction.
Why? I mean, what use do you see in executing a shared library? It sounds like adding complicated and unnecessary usecases.
- eterps 4y agoIt's the other way around that can be suboptimal. If some application wants to integrate git it could execute in a subshell (which is frowned upon for good reasons) or use libgit instead. This works great in the case of git, but for all other useful stuff that doesnt have its own lib that provides that basic functionality you're out of luck.
- arinlen 4y ago> It's the other way around that can be suboptimal. If some application wants to integrate git it could execute in a subshell (which is frowned upon for good reasons) or use libgit instead. What's wrong with invoking an executable or using libgit? It seems you're totally missing the whole point. The problem was never that you could not consume libraries from an executable. The actual problem is that you're somehow expecting to consume a third-party package in a way that the project maintainers do not support, let alone maintain. Adding a build flag that supports a convoluted and arguably useless usecases of linking with symbols shipped in third-party executables change nothing.