[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130616062507.GA19067@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2013 02:25:07 -0400
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: musl size breakdown
Completely un-rigorous at the moment, but I thought these figures may
be interesting. All size contributions are approximations based on
my i386 build with -O3 and the size -t command, converted to
percentages of the whole library size via quick mental math.
20% math (including complex)
15% iconv
10% stdio
10% regex/glob
10% crypt
5% network (esp. dns)
4% unicode tables (ctype)
3% string functions
3% threads
2% numeric parser/converters
2% time handling
1% malloc
1% unistd
That leaves about 14% unaccounted for, presumably in lots of small
stuff that just adds up. It would be interesting to see how these
percentages compare with other implementations, and how users react to
them and whether they're perceived as justified.
With the further iconv features that are planned for the future, as
well as corrections to the complex math code, math and iconv will have
an interesting battle ahead to claim the size title. Math has an even
greater chance of keeping the title if we consider non-i387 archs
where most math functions involve a great deal of code rather than
tiny asm implementations.
Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
