Dynamic Libraries vs Header-Only Libraries

Developers should use dynamic libraries when building modular applications that need to share code across multiple executables, as they reduce binary size and memory footprint meets developers should use header-only libraries when they need lightweight, easy-to-integrate solutions for tasks like json parsing, logging, or mathematical computations in c++ projects. Here's our take.

Dynamic Libraries

Nice Pick

Developers should use dynamic libraries when building modular applications that need to share code across multiple executables, as they reduce binary size and memory footprint

Pros

• They are essential for plugin architectures, system libraries, and software that requires runtime updates or versioning, such as operating system components or large-scale applications with shared dependencies
• Related to: static-libraries, linker

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

Header-Only Libraries

Developers should use header-only libraries when they need lightweight, easy-to-integrate solutions for tasks like JSON parsing, logging, or mathematical computations in C++ projects

Pros

• They are ideal for rapid prototyping, small to medium-sized applications, or when avoiding complex build systems is a priority, as they require no compilation and can be included directly with minimal setup
• Related to: c-plus-plus, cmake

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

The Verdict

These tools serve different purposes. Dynamic Libraries is a concept while Header-Only Libraries is a library. We picked Dynamic Libraries based on overall popularity, but your choice depends on what you're building.

The Bottom Line

Dynamic Libraries wins

Based on overall popularity. Dynamic Libraries is more widely used, but Header-Only Libraries excels in its own space.