From: Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com>
To: Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org>
Cc: "Ludovic Courtès" <ludo@gnu.org>, guile-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: About Guile crypto support
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 09:20:55 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87pq07uuqg.fsf@pobox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87zjzd4br8.fsf@tines.lan> (Mark H. Weaver's message of "Sat, 09 Feb 2013 12:50:51 -0500")
Howdy,
On Sat 09 Feb 2013 18:50, Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org> writes:
> Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com> writes:
>
>> I have the feeling that we should implement our own FOO function
>> without libBAR.
>
> Wouldn't it be better to fix these problems in libBAR, to the benefit
> of all its users, than for each of its users to duplicate its
> functionality within their own projects?
This is a nice description of the advantages of shared libraries in
general, but to be fair we should list the disadvantages as well:
- Coordination cost (working with upstream on bugs/features)
- QA cost (does the user have a bug-free libfoo or not?)
- Runtime cost (another shared library)
- Extensibility cost (does using the library prevent us from making
extensions to functionality in the area that the library solves?)
So I think the discussion about external dependencies should be, "does
this dependency pay for itself?" For libgc, gmp, libffi, and
libunistring, the answer for me is "yes, definitely". For ltdl, my
instinct is "no".
Just MHO :)
Andy
--
http://wingolog.org/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-02-11 8:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-02-03 12:55 About Guile crypto support Nala Ginrut
2013-02-03 15:37 ` Thien-Thi Nguyen
2013-02-04 1:14 ` Daniel Hartwig
2013-02-04 3:12 ` Nala Ginrut
2013-02-04 3:35 ` Daniel Hartwig
2013-02-04 4:15 ` Nala Ginrut
2013-02-04 23:03 ` Ludovic Courtès
2013-02-05 2:43 ` Nala Ginrut
2013-02-05 2:57 ` Noah Lavine
2013-02-06 13:58 ` Nala Ginrut
2013-02-05 15:48 ` Ludovic Courtès
2013-02-06 4:18 ` Daniel Hartwig
2013-02-06 4:28 ` Daniel Hartwig
2013-02-08 16:21 ` Ludovic Courtès
2013-02-09 1:37 ` Daniel Hartwig
2013-02-09 15:12 ` Ludovic Courtès
2013-02-09 17:02 ` Andy Wingo
2013-02-09 17:50 ` Mark H Weaver
2013-02-09 20:44 ` Noah Lavine
2013-02-09 21:53 ` Ludovic Courtès
2013-02-11 8:20 ` Andy Wingo [this message]
2013-02-11 9:15 ` Thien-Thi Nguyen
2013-02-11 10:46 ` Mike Gran
2013-02-11 13:14 ` Ludovic Courtès
2013-02-11 9:51 ` Nala Ginrut
2013-02-11 15:23 ` Greg Troxel
2013-02-12 1:12 ` Daniel Hartwig
2013-02-12 4:20 ` Nala Ginrut
2013-02-12 5:21 ` Daniel Hartwig
2013-02-12 7:40 ` Dynamic FFI vs Static FFI (was Re: About Guile crypto support) Mark H Weaver
2013-02-12 13:52 ` Ludovic Courtès
2013-02-12 18:24 ` Mark H Weaver
2013-02-12 21:49 ` Ludovic Courtès
2013-02-14 7:21 ` William ML Leslie
2013-02-15 13:34 ` Nala Ginrut
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87pq07uuqg.fsf@pobox.com \
--to=wingo@pobox.com \
--cc=guile-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=ludo@gnu.org \
--cc=mhw@netris.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).