Is there any additional cost of splitting code into a separate library from the main application?

I can understand the added value when starting the application to load a separate DLL, but is there any overhead when linking to code in a separate library?

Let's say I have my application (be it ASP.NET WebForms, MVC or WinForms), and I decide for one reason or another, that from a service point of view, it’s better that several classes are moved to their own separate library, so that I I can swim with other applications on top of it for a while on the road.

Is there any increased overhead when referencing classes in a shared library than if I saved them inside my main application and named them there? I want to pull them out, but the application has potential requirements for huge scaling, so I don’t want to shoot in the leg by doing this.

Usually I would move the code to my own library without giving it a second thought, but usually I do not write applications that require the level of scaling necessary for this, and therefore I now guess the second.

+3
source share
6 answers

If it makes sense in terms of design / API code / code - do it!

A faster processor is cheaper than a programmer who needs to support the Big Dirt Ball.

+7

, , , . , , .

, AppDomains, : Per AppDomain (.. AppDomains). AppDomains, ( , , , ).

, , , , .

, , , , , . .

+3

- , ( ).

, , , , ( ) ( ).

- ​​ , , , .

+3

, , - , . , , . . , .

+2

- : Visual Studio/Resharper (< 15) .

. .

+1

, , ( winforms) , . , /-/ ., "" , , , . app.config . , . , ! TheEruditeTroglodyte

0
source

Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/1724829/


All Articles