Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 21:16:09 +0200 From: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Draft: musl promo materials * Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx> [2012-07-13 14:12:54 -0400]: > Consistent quality and implementation behavior from tiny embedded > systems to full servers. > > Minimal machine-specific code, meaning less chance of breakage on > minority architectures and better success with "write once run > everywhere" development. > > Realtime-quality robustness. No unnecessary dynamic allocation. No > unrecoverable late failures. No lazy binding or lazy allocation. > > MIT license. > > Full math library with a focus on correctness. Exact and > correctly-rounded conversion between binary floating point and decimal > strings. > > Reentrancy, thread-safety, and async-signal safety well beyond the > requirements of POSIX. Even snprintf and dprintf are fully reentrant > and async-signal-safe. > > Highly resource-efficient POSIX threads implementation, making > multi-threaded application design viable even for memory-constrained > systems. i'd somehow add that both static and dynamic linking is supported properly and without bloat as musl is better at it than glibc i like musl's clean code, clean header files (no gcc specific mess) and simple build system (even for cross compilation) again something that glibc is lacking and there could be a hint that things like security, worst cases (stack usage, algorithm complexity) and conformance are taken seriously
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.