NOTICE: This version of the NSF Unidata web site (archive.unidata.ucar.edu) is no longer being updated.
Current content can be found at unidata.ucar.edu.
To learn about what's going on, see About the Archive Site.
NOTICE: This version of the NSF Unidata web site (archive.unidata.ucar.edu) is no longer being updated.
Current content can be found at unidata.ucar.edu.
To learn about what's going on, see About the Archive Site.
> There are several reasons to use shared libraries:
>
> 1. Disk space savings.
> ...
This is a good overall statistic to judge also the decrease in link time and
memory space, so I'm wondering how much you save here. Anyone? Even if it
is less than 100KB it might still be worth it since then many applications
could use netcdf without much increase in system resource needs. Especially
tool-oriented applications that are kept around in executable form.
> [Bruce] mentioned a disadvantage of "fragility" of executables since they
> are dependent on the state of the library. This is certainly true, but
> can be mitigated by careful maintenance of the library. With a properly
> constructed library, it is possible to upgrade netCDF to a new version
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> (assuming backward code compatability) and have old executables automatically
> use the new version without relinking.
I would hope for a somewhat better prognosis. What are the pitfalls?
--
Maurice LeBrun mjl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Institute for Fusion Studies, University of Texas at Austin
Faire de la bonne cuisine demande un certain temps. Si on vous fait
attendre, c'est pour mieux vous servir, et vous plaire.
[menu of restaurant Antoine, New Orleans]
netcdfgroup archives: