Redpill me on musl Vs glibc

Redpill me on musl Vs glibc.

Attached: Gentoo_OpenBSD_logo.png (1280x1024, 816K)

Other urls found in this thread:

etalabs.net/compare_libcs.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

If you're asking this question, you'd have no reason to run musl.

nvm I figured it out

use musl unless shit you use breaks

musl is objectively better than glibc, but since a bunch of shit software makes use of non-standard glibc extension lockin, it can be tricky to compile with musl

no i didn't, this guy is pretending to be me!

It always makes me kek when faggots claim C is portable, even though every major C project that exists is dependent on GNUshit.

C is portable but only when it's written by a competent developer that respects standards, and even that's hard with shit like gcc -ansi not actually enforcing strict ANSI.

basically fuck gcc and fuck freetards

The truth that Cniles don't want to acknowledge is that C++ is more portable than C.

maybe, but a lot of the really "portable" shit I tend to mess with like benchmarks are much more often written in C and you can find an ansi-compliant compiler for just about any platform in existence, so I don't care all that much

cute

i'm confused now

There's no need for an alternative to glibc, unless you are a corporation and want to cuck your users, then you choose all those non-copyleft software like clang, musl, etc.

>and want to cuck your users
said the guy advocating for software that locks users into their implementation and keeps them from seeking out higher quality alternatives with non-standard extensions and other harmful practices

This.

guys which is more minimal

glibc or musl

musl, easily
etalabs.net/compare_libcs.html
check out that massive size difference

which os do you use
do you recommend me musl

I mostly use Void, and I'd say the libc on offer is quite a ways down the priority list unless you're going LFS.

I am a C++ developer, but C++ isn't "more portable" simply because MSVC supports C++11/14/17 features whereas it deliberately does not support C90 features.

Winfags must go.

musl is fast and secure. /thread

should i pull the trigger and use void?
its pretty iffy honestly cause the owner left or whatever.

alpine vs void?
thoughts?

C++ is more portable because it's possible to actually write portable C++, while C projects inevitably drag in GNU extensions.

>while C projects inevitably drag in GNU extensions.
Which are supported on all of the compilers that actually matters.

>all of the compilers that actually matters
Basically only GCC and Clang. In other words, no more portable than C++.
You won't see gnushit supported in tcc - even c99 support is tenuous.

Why in the first place? Don't tell me you're falling for the minimal meme.

Attached: 1544261608738.jpg (817x700, 189K)

yes bro

well then clearly tcc just sucks.

GCC is no better than proprietary software

>Basically only GCC and Clang.
As I said, literally all compilers that actually matter.

Stop being such a hipster faggot. Just because it's popular doesn't mean that it's bad.

Except it allows you to run the program as you wish, for any purpose, study how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish, redistribute copies so you can help others, and distribute copies of your modified versions to others
So no, it's nothing like proprietary software

And the compilers that double as C++ compilers.

Examples of the non-standard extensions? I tend to only use c for embedded stuff anymore (python has taken over desktop and server coding, for better or worse), so I'm out of the loop on this. But I do keep a bsd box running verify all my non-embedded stuff is clean.

He means stuff like __attribute__((packed)) and alignment and aliasing qualifiers which I'm pretty sure 99.9% of C compilers support.

Alignment qualifiers are standardized now.

Nested functions. They are sometimes used in the Linux kernel too, if I'm not mistaken, but luckily, it is moving towards a more standardized codebase. As of 4.20, it is also VLA-free.