A comparison of dietlibc, uclibc, musl, and glibc, by the author of musl: http://www.etalabs.net/compare_libcs.html
- musl: 4 releases so far in 2019, 2 in 2018, 3 in 2017[1]
- uClibc: No releases since 2012[2]
- uClibc-ng: 2 releases in 2019, 3 in 2018, 6 in 2017[3]
- dietlibc: only 1 release since 2013[4]
[1] https://www.musl-libc.org/releases/
you missed the first entry (20180924).
> Another factor to consider is release cadence
It's questionable that "more releases" == "better". Sometimes software is (ideally) just done (except for security issues). I use a lot of software that has no significant changes since decades. Regarding a libc-replacement I couldn't name a single important thing for the last years.
But of course, no release could also be a bad sign, like beeing abandoned or that is has just no users (testers).
* Supporting new syscalls, such as getrandom(), or extra options on existing syscalls (e.g., socket options).
* Support for libc-components of new hardware versions, such as the register state information that you get on signals.
* Supporting new versions of C, such as C11.
* Improving performance of threading and memory allocation, among other things.
* Updating Unicode tables for locale information.
musl-1.1.24.tar.gz (sig) - October 13, 2019
musl-1.1.23.tar.gz (sig) - July 16, 2019
musl-1.1.22.tar.gz (sig) - April 9, 2019
musl-1.1.21.tar.gz (sig) - January 21, 2019
Out of interest, what are some new things (those bringing real performance gain) from the last 6 years which a standard library needs to adapt to actively?
Edit: also note that OP made this pointed on purpose, the last release is from 2018, one year ago, not 2013...
the compiler will almost never automatically generate this code.
Also note that openrisc has been mostly superceded by risc-v, which afaik glibc and musl both support; don't know about the other libcs.
musl 1.1.5
uClibc 0.9.33.2 (Buildroot 2015.02)
dietlibc 0.32
glibc 2.19