There was a time where this debate was bigger. It seems the world has shifted towards architectures and tooling that does not allow dynamic linking or makes it harder. This compromise makes it easier for the maintainers of the tools / languages, but does take away choice from the user / developer. But maybe that’s not important? What are your thoughts?

  • uis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    You can statically link half a gig of Qt5 for every single application(half a gig for calendar, half a gig for file mager, etc) or keep it normal size. Also if there will be new bug in openssl, it is not your headache to monitor for vuln announcements.

    This compromise makes it easier for the maintainers of the tools / languages

    What do you mean? Also how would you implement plug-ins in language that explicitly forbids dynamic loading, assuming such language exists.