I believe selecting a particular compiler has more of an effect on perl performance than the issue of shared/static build. Gcc-4.8 seems to produce better executable than either gcc-5.3 or clang (possibly due to match of development toolset). Having done no extensive benchmarking, I cannot offer anything conclusive, however.
I would advise you to trust the wisdom of perl maintainers (and their configure tools) and the wisdom of perl vendors (OS providers). E.g. the latest slackware-stable ships with shared perl (-Duseshrplib).
If you believe that a different set of compile options would prove generally superior by a large margin, then this is a claim you need to substantiate. Test it, show it, prove it.
In reply to Re^3: Wisdom for building an Efficient Perl/PerlMagick?
by Anonymous Monk
in thread Wisdom for building an Efficient Perl/PerlMagick?
by BrianP
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |