Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 17:47:26 +0200 From: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Best place to discuss other lightweight libraries? * Kurt H Maier <khm-lists@...ma.in> [2013-04-24 07:48:52 -0400]: > On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 01:18:43PM +0200, Daniel Cegie??ka wrote: > > > > btw. has anyone used go with musl? > > > > Go ships its own libc, which I'm fairly certain it depends on. It's > also not suitable as a system programming language and they dropped that > claim from their propaganda some time ago. > go has its own independent world (own toolchain, syscall wrappers, runtime, calling convention, stack management etc) but it can interact with libc through cgo so the question might be if anyone has tried cgo with musl and i guess nobody tried but it should work since cgo does not make much assumptions about the c runtime go is special in this respect, most other language runtime implementations build on top of libc so the interaction between c and said language is less trivial (there are some caveats in go as well: it does not call __libc_start_main on startup nor exit on exit so eg atexit handlers wont get called)
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.