From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS3215 2.6.0.0/16 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [IPv6:2620:52:3:1:0:246e:9693:128c]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 596431F910 for ; Thu, 17 Nov 2022 09:46:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=sourceware.org header.i=@sourceware.org header.b="qc8Td1Wl"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A29B6395C016 for ; Thu, 17 Nov 2022 09:46:41 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org A29B6395C016 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1668678401; bh=RivNYQc0eRZcbIDlFOc86G5ihThfJLzsdIC7q1MkXT8=; h=Subject:To:Date:In-Reply-To:References:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To: From; b=qc8Td1WllaW9t72cE81hVLVfB0znvCY6HCoI7YDCNk1llLpQ9dCweCIoCv6dAWGF/ q4sRPvMlVf9ILcOmPX9/fJXGnkSSEZVJGy5H3s/CVeXGbkyr99eHu4FBlkNSE8a+zp hy06a5FPmfms2gT4l4xTo7oaGx/x+h3+bUmHrnEg= Received: from xry111.site (xry111.site [IPv6:2001:470:683e::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 94A873830B04 for ; Thu, 17 Nov 2022 09:46:21 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 94A873830B04 Received: from [IPv6:240e:358:1127:2800:dc73:854d:832e:3] (unknown [IPv6:240e:358:1127:2800:dc73:854d:832e:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature ECDSA (P-384) server-digest SHA384) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: xry111@xry111.site) by xry111.site (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AB9D36674F; Thu, 17 Nov 2022 04:46:17 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3a62e9dd71c1e542e38d6444c955a44185e07936.camel@xry111.site> Subject: Re: Why is glibc not extensive? To: A , libc-alpha@sourceware.org Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2022 17:46:09 +0800 In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.46.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: libc-alpha@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libc-alpha mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Xi Ruoyao via Libc-alpha Reply-To: Xi Ruoyao Errors-To: libc-alpha-bounces+e=80x24.org@sourceware.org Sender: "Libc-alpha" On Thu, 2022-11-17 at 12:05 +0530, A via Libc-alpha wrote: > Hi, >=20 > In my opinion, glibc should have support for maps, sets, balanced > binary trees, many more string functions, etc. (I know tree and hash > are there in glibc), so that developers don't have to implement them > themselves, thus saving lots of man hours all over the world. Because it will save more man hours by implementing them in a separate library. You can link the library against any libc (glibc, musl, msvcrt, binoic, the libc on Mac OS X - I can't recall the name, ...) instead of adding the implementation into all libc implementations. > This will also make C more user friendly like C++ and Java. Glibc just contains one implementation of C standard library, it's not "the reference implementation": there is just no such a thing in the world. The proposal of changing the spec of C language or standard library should be sent to WG14, not here. --=20 Xi Ruoyao School of Aerospace Science and Technology, Xidian University