Post #3514381

standard musl is lightweight but the performance is much worse than glibc. Is it? I never heard this statement before (note not saying its wrong or right, just never read about that). I wonder if that statement is true and if it even matters in most cases. Similar to how performance of Python doesn’t matter for all kind of programs. The main benefit of musl is, it can be embedded into the application to make it standalone without depending on a dynamic library. Its entirely possible the code is not as optimized as glibc, but maybe it depends on the programming language its used and compiled with? Also maybe the stuff you read and heard was from early versions of musl and later they improved it to match glibc. Just speculation, but we don’t have anything else at hand right now.