| |||||||||||||
A turning point for GNU libcA turning point for GNU libcPosted Mar 29, 2012 0:48 UTC (Thu) by geofft (subscriber, #59789)In reply to: A turning point for GNU libc by wahern Parent article: A turning point for GNU libc Saying "just use glib" is cargo cult programming, IMNSHO. Why would I use a 300k SLoC library just for a saner way to copy a string? Because it's a saner way to do _everything_. If you just want strings, you can go use the Better String Library (bstring), but then you need to go find a better everything else library, too. Besides, you're cargo-culting a one million SLoC library called glibc, and arguing for the inclusion of more functions in it... if you like "plain, vanilla C", you're welcome to copy strings without glibc. :) (Or with another standard library like dietlibc.)
(Log in to post comments)
A turning point for GNU libc Posted Mar 29, 2012 11:47 UTC (Thu) by jnareb (subscriber, #46500) [Link]
> Because it's a saner way to do _everything_. If you just want strings, you can go use the Better String Library (bstring), but then you need to go find a better everything else library, too.
Nb. Git went the way of creating own 'strbuf' micro-library for string manipulation.
|
|||||||||||||