3 ms·
I think the libc people might argue this level of functionality is just outside the scope of libc. (Arguably, it is a mistake for DNS to be part of libc, given
by loeg 1y ago
I think the libc people might argue this level of functionality is just outside the scope of libc. (Arguably, it is a mistake for DNS to be part of libc, given how complicated it is.)
- ComputerGuru 1y agoTo be sure, complexity isn’t the determinator for whether something is or isn’t in scope for libc though.
- loeg 1y agoHistorically libcs have been leery of imposing threading on otherwise singlethreaded applications; and for similar reasons, try to minimize startup costs.
- Someone 1y agohttps://sourceware.org/glibc/ https://sourceware.org/glibc/ says “The GNU C Library is designed to be a backwards compatible, portable, and high performance ISO C library. It aims to follow all relevant standards including ISO C11, POSIX.1-2008, and IEEE 754-2008.” ⇒ I don’t think they make that argument.
- loeg 1y agoThe standards make no requirement that an implementation be good, performant, or even useful.