Hacker News Reader

Not that I'm aware of. However, I would expect large regressions (20%+) in general, e.g. the malloc implementation in musl is famously primitive.

View on HN

To ask a very stupid question: why don't they just replace it with a better one? Aren't allocator functions fairly well studied and by definition have source code already written? What's stopping them being able to just drop-in someething else to provide malloc()?

This is what ChimeraLinux has done.

https://chimera-linux.org/docs/configuration/musl

How could anyone who cares about allocator performance be satisfied with glibc's allocator in the first place?

Yeah, I suppose that's fair. Still, the musl malloc implementation is just the most infamous example of its subpar performance. Obviously glibc comes with an enormous amount of functionality and performance optimizations.

Somewhat unrelated, but I'm looking forward to llvm-libc becoming a practical replacement for musl. I'd love a modern, non-gnu libc implementation that isn't so dogmatic.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com