From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Aug 28 22:48:04 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id WAA12629 for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 28 Aug 1997 22:48:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hokkshideh.jetcafe.org (hokkshideh.jetcafe.org [207.155.21.4]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA12603 for ; Thu, 28 Aug 1997 22:47:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hokkshideh.jetcafe.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hokkshideh.jetcafe.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id WAA21599 for ; Thu, 28 Aug 1997 22:51:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199708290551.WAA21599@hokkshideh.jetcafe.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0delta 6/3/97 To: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: shared libraries? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 22:51:02 -0700 From: Dave Hayes Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Warner Losh writes: > Generally, on most architectures PIC code is slower than non-PIC code. > At least on sparc, 68k, mips and alpha (as well as x86). The > generally quoted number is 10%. That's what various docs that I've > seen over the years have quoted. That's one reason why many > benchmarks are done with static binaries... Perhaps it is that I have witnessed speedups in programs using shared libraries as opposed to not. *shrug* ------ Dave Hayes - Altadena CA, USA - dave@jetcafe.org >>> The opinions expressed above are entirely my own <<< Freedom Knight of Usenet - http://www.jetcafe.org/~dave/usenet There is a great deal of talk about loyalty from the bottom to the top. Loyalty from the top down is even more necessary and much less prevalent.