On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 01:12:29PM -0500, Robert Fischer wrote:
Yeah, that's what it's called, but the wiki just called it
"libcamlrun.so", and that was what was referenced in the
Makefile.config, so I went with that. Is the only consequence of
calling it libcamlrun.so a performance hit due to the dynamic link,
or
should I go back and try this approach?
The name shouldn't make any difference.
There is a (small) performance penalty from using a shared library
over a static library, but on x86-64 you don't have any choice in the
matter because of shortcomings in the Linux linker.
Rich.
--
Richard Jones
Red Hat
_______________________________________________
Modcaml mailing list
address@hidden
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/modcaml