• @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      424 days ago

      Glib us licensed under LGPL. So unless your project is happy with that, it’s as if it didn’t exist. That’s one of the problems of having a small standard library.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        524 days ago

        It’s one of the more permissive licenses - who the hell is going to have a problem with lgpl? You can ship it with proprietary applications.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        324 days ago

        It’s a single counterexample. there are many, many such libraries for C and the programmer does not have to roll their own.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      724 days ago

      Well, let’s be real: many C programs don’t want to rely on Glib, and licensing (as the other reply mentioned) is only one reason. Glib is not exactly known for high performance, and is significantly slower than the alternatives supported by the other languages I mentioned.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          724 days ago

          Which one should I pick then, that is both as fast as the std solutions in the other languages and as reusable for arbitrary use cases?

          Because it sounds like your initial pick made you loose the machine efficiency argument and you can’t have it both ways.