Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 10:54:34 +0200 From: Luca Barbato <lu_zero@...too.org> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Musl-extra: C general-purpose and utility library On 9/19/12 10:38 AM, Arvid E. Picciani wrote: > On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 09:31:47 -0400, Rich Felker wrote: > >> Personally, I think a clean, sane, bloat-free implementation of the >> C++ standard library would be a lot more valuable for this kind of >> work than a new non-standardized C library. > > for C++? pretty hard to do that, the language is horrible already :/ > I like Qt, since it doesn't even try to follow the C++ spirit, > but then again its weird on its own. > > Indeed, C is not the place to do high level stuff in. > I'm still waiting for clay [http://claylabs.com/clay/] to become usable, > before dropping C++ for system services. Clay uses llvm so till somebody doesn't make a C compiler out of it (or make the gcc backend have a decent api like llvm) you will need a C++ standard library. 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.