[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 17:21:25 +0200
From: Luca Barbato <lu_zero@...too.org>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Best place to discuss other lightweight libraries?
On 04/22/2013 04:53 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
> - Thread allergies, i.e. horribly over-complicating program logic to
> avoid threads. The best examples I can think of are the added logic
> needed to generalize a program that's reading from ordinary file
> descriptors (e.g. connection sockets) in an event loop to support
> SSL sockets or zlib-compressed streams. (Note: there are ways to
> address this kind of problem more cleanly without threads too, but
> nobody does it. I can elaborate if anybody's interested.)
I'm interested to read about it.
> - DBus.
Sadly nobody is pushing for a better local socket multicast abstraction
to send notifications back and forth in an efficient fashion.
I'm hoping for nanomsg once it is complete or Binder once it is
correctly documented ^^; (and thus implemented in more than few forks of
linux and maybe haiku)
> - Use of global state. Even seemingly-harmless things like a global
> registered log function are harmful, because two different libraries
> (or the main program and a library) might be trying to use the
> library with the global log destination, and clobbering each other's
> choices.
For this there aren't solution that won't cause different problems I'm
afraid.
> - Designs based on shared libraries, especially lots of them. This
> creates bloat and often interferes with the ability to use static
> linking.
Special mention to those that want to do clever stuff on the init
section (e.g. change a program global state from there)
> - Dependency on any library with the above problems. :-)
And that kills everybody using glib? *runs and hides*
lu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
