<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dw="https://www.dreamwidth.org">
  <id>tag:dreamwidth.org,2017-04-20:3147171</id>
  <title>lmemsm</title>
  <subtitle>lmemsm</subtitle>
  <author>
    <name>lmemsm</name>
  </author>
  <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://lmemsm.dreamwidth.org/"/>
  <link rel="self" type="text/xml" href="https://lmemsm.dreamwidth.org/data/atom"/>
  <updated>2024-06-04T20:23:38Z</updated>
  <dw:journal username="lmemsm" type="personal"/>
  <entry>
    <id>tag:dreamwidth.org,2017-04-20:3147171:6683</id>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://lmemsm.dreamwidth.org/6683.html"/>
    <link rel="self" type="text/xml" href="https://lmemsm.dreamwidth.org/data/atom/?itemid=6683"/>
    <title>C runtime libraries</title>
    <published>2017-05-15T15:10:49Z</published>
    <updated>2024-06-04T20:23:38Z</updated>
    <category term="newlib"/>
    <category term="windows ce"/>
    <category term="c"/>
    <category term="eglibc"/>
    <category term="linux"/>
    <category term="bionic"/>
    <category term="c runtime library"/>
    <category term="pdclib"/>
    <category term="musl"/>
    <category term="mingwrt"/>
    <category term="tre"/>
    <category term="mscvrt"/>
    <category term="bsd"/>
    <category term="windows"/>
    <dw:security>public</dw:security>
    <dw:reply-count>0</dw:reply-count>
    <summary type="html">Was at a PHP meetup where the group was discussing Docker.  Members and the presenter knew certain Linux distributions had a smaller footprint for use with Docker.  I was surprised to find out they really didn't know why that was.  One of the key factors is the C runtime library.  Basic C runtime libraries just cover the functions and data structures that are part of the ISO C standard.  Many C runtime libraries also add functions and data structures that are part of the POSIX standard as documented by the Open Group.  Some C runtime libraries are rather bloated and provide a wide variety of functions (even beyond those documented by the ISO C and POSIX standards).  Others provide a bare minimum.  Some, especially those targeting embedded systems are designed for efficiency.  Others are designed for functionality.  Some provide no Unicode support (locale 'C' only).  Some like musl, concentrate on UTF-8 support.  Some try to support a large variety of characters sets and internationalization features.  All these factors can affect code size and efficiency when compiling programs.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;b&gt;(&lt;a href="https://lmemsm.dreamwidth.org/6683.html"&gt;Read more ...&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/b&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;img src="https://www.dreamwidth.org/tools/commentcount?user=lmemsm&amp;ditemid=6683" width="30" height="12" alt="comment count unavailable" style="vertical-align: middle;"/&gt; comments</summary>
  </entry>
</feed>
