I'm not arguing about dynamic versus static linking. In fact, I think dynamic linking is pretty bad. I'm just arguing against distributing libraries all in one big C file. You can statically link against an archive built from several sources.
>I don't consider open source projects a black box, I evaluate every project under the lens of someone who expects to someday have to work with the code myself and send patches upstream.
And I think I'm squarely in the target audience for this tool anyway. What makes you think it's a feature for someone else?
> What makes you think it's a feature for someone else.
The fact that they mention it specifically and proudly on the front page indicates to me that the author, and the NetBSD maintainers who accepted it, consider it good that it is a single, largely self-contained source file. It is only ~1300 source lines, so I don't see why it should necessarily be split out. Something tells me the original authors and the ongoing maintainers of this file have a better idea what value this choice represents than you do (since you haven't said anything particularly compelling in favour of splitting this into several files and objects).
