Re^2: Inline::C on Windows: how to improve performance of compiled code?

the difference must be in the two Perl interpreters themselves

Couldn't it alternatively be that the difference is in the way that the 2 different systems (ie Linux and Windows) access functions in external shared libraries ?

Cheers,
Rob

Comment on Re^2: Inline::C on Windows: how to improve performance of compiled code?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Inline::C on Windows: how to improve performance of compiled code? by Marshall (Canon) on Jun 15, 2018 at 15:03 UTC
Interesting question... I came across a public article about linking and differences between Windows and Unix by Symantec: Symantec, Dynamic Linking in Linux and Windows, part one Symantec, Dynamic Linking in Linux and Windows, part two This is not a "light read" and I did not study it in depth. I'm not sure if this article "jives" with what I heard 20 years ago..that Linux can load a .so faster than Windows can load a .DLL, because Windows has to adjust jump addresses and potentially make another copy of the DLL which takes time, but that once linked, calling (running) with the Windows DLL is faster? I was working on systems around the time that NT was a separate thing from Windows. Anyway there appears to be a lot of detail for those inclined in the above articles. I have never used Inline:C or linked to an external C program with Perl. I don't know what difference there may be with that either. BrowserUk does a lot of Windows combined with C stuff and hopefully he can shower some wisdom down upon us.	[reply]
A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.


Clear questions and runnable code get the best and fastest answer
	PerlMonks