-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.4k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Do static linking by default #10209
Comments
Nominating, though I think we can live without this for 1.0 |
P-low, not necessary to do this (or decide about doing it) for 1.0. |
As an embedded user of Rust, this would be really really nice and would make 1.0 significantly more appealing. |
+1 for static linking by default |
I believe that as it stands today #10740 blocks this bug. |
Now that #10740 is closed, I'm still not entirely convinced that we should do this by default. This makes linking |
Closing, we prefer static linking by default, and #11253 is the tracker for whether we should output an rlib or a dylib by default for libraries. |
[arithmetic_side_effects] Fix rust-lang#10209 Fix rust-lang#10209 --- changelog: Enhancement: [`arithmetic_side_effects`]: No longer lints, if safe constant values are used. [rust-lang#10310](rust-lang/rust-clippy#10310) <!-- changelog_checked -->
I currently believe there is little hope that Rust libraries can offer any meaningful binary forward compatibility or upgradability. Since this is one of the primary benefits of dynamic linking (the other being reduction in code size), and static linking having other advantages of convenience, perhaps we should prefer static linking by default.
cc #10208 #10188
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: