RFA: Please review the new C++ demangler patch

[Phil Edwards]

On Fri, Jun 27, 2003 at 10:55:47PM +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> Phil Edwards <phil@jaj.com> writes:
> 
> | support can still use it.  That's why it was moved to libsupc++, so that...
> | 
> |     gcc a_c++_program_only_using_clause_18.cc -lsupc++
> | 
> | ...a.out does not depend on libstdc++.so at runtime.
> 
> May I suggest static link?

You can suggest it, but that doesn't mean it's a good idea.  :-)  Why fold
a completely unused library into the executable?

Not only would the executable be needlessly large, the users would still
suffer the overhead caused by libstdc++'s startup code.  That's one of the
whole points of libsupc++.  Static linking doesn't solve the problem that
libsupc++ was created to solve, and it introduces its own problems.


Phil

-- 
If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater
than the animating contest for freedom, go home and leave us in peace.  We seek
not your counsel, nor your arms.  Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you;
and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.            - Samuel Adams