Comparison of C/POSIX standard library implementations for Linux

BRANK

A project of Eta Labs.The table below and notes which follow are a comparison of some of the different standard library implementations available for Linux, with a particular focus on the balance between feature-richness and bloat. I have tried to be fair and objective, but as I am the author of musl, that may have influenced my choice of which aspects to compare.Future directions for this comparison include detailed performance benchmarking and inclusion of additional library implementations, especially Google's Bionic and other BSD libc ports.Bloat comparisonmusluClibcdietlibcglibcComplete .a set426k500k120k2.0M †Complete .so set527k560k185k7.9M †Smallest static C program1.8k5k0.2k662kStatic hello (using printf)13k70k6k662kDynamic overhead (min. dirty)20k40k40k48kStatic overhead (min. dirty)8k12k8k28kStatic stdio overhead (min. dirty)8k24k16k36kConfigurable featuresetnoyesminimalminimalBehavior on resource exhaustionmusluClibcdietlibcglibcThread-local storagereports failureabortsn…