On Fri, 10 Jun 2016, Louis Santillan <lpsan...@gmail.com> wrote: > As to justification, I'd say, that depends. Libc (and C in general) > has some well known, well documented bugs that exists simply to keep > old code compiling (many methods that start with str*, malloc/free > corner but frequent cases, etc). I'd say that's sucks. And that is > why we have seen the proliferation of languages in the last 30 years > (since ansi c acceptance). A condition of NIH and a far worse sin > than trying to fix the situation by utilizing a lower level api. > > Take Plan 9 or Go-lang. Is that NIH? Or is that someone > experimenting and/or seizing an opportunity to suckless?
Very good points. However I don't think such a low-level framework belongs as a part of an smtpd. If libc sucks, write a better libc! But make sure it's well-tested, portable, bug-free, usable, uses good and sane interfaces, etc etc etc. Then measure adoption in applications versus other libnih's.
