Standalone Win32 wxPython apps?

[Grant Edwards]

In article <1a9n8us1629mrvei40hdkuuerc1j6p318m at 4ax.com>, Courageous wrote:
> 
>>Hmm, I don't really see the difference in practice between
>>statically linking and installing a bunch of "private" DLLs
>>that are only used by my app.  In one case they're all in one
>>file, in the other case they're in a bunch of files that have
>>to be linked at run-time. In both cases none of the stuff is
>>being shared with anybody else, so it's not like putting things
>>in DLLs is saving any system resources -- though it perhaps
>>make the packaging simpler.
> 
> The case for the DLL is more obvious when what it is your
> distributing is a family of applications which live together.
> There may also be load time differences between an application
> that is statically linked and one that is dynamically linked.
> I seem to recall in my Unix days that using .so's dramatically
> quickened load times.

I would think that for an isolated app, .so's would slow down
load times.  With a statically linked program all you do is a
single memmap() call (well, ignoring a few details).  With
.so's you've actually got to resolve all of the symbols and do
the linking step (not required for statically linked images).

Since you've got the same number of bytes to swap in off disk,
that should be a wash.

If, most of the .so's are already paged in because they're
being used by other programs, then I can see that using .so's
could speed things up since you don't have to wait for the VM
system to page them into RAM.

-- 
Grant Edwards                   grante             Yow!  Hello, GORRY-O!! I'm
                                  at               a GENIUS from HARVARD!!
                               visi.com