i spoke sloppily. i meant (and elsewhere in that mail mentioned) the 
old-bsd libc that was used, long ago, with pcc on berkeley systems, and
which grew in much the same environment and from much the same origins as 
pcc. When the pcc/gcc thread came up in the past, one of the big 
performance issues was that the old libc in 4.3bsd was faster (and looser
when it came to protections and checking)- this had thrown off results 
from benchmarking a lot of programs, because gcc's optimization wasnt 
always better enough to overcome the slowness in gnu libc.


On Tue, 25 Sep 2007, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
>> but on the other hand, pcc's libc is much simpler (and somewhat less safe
>> or correct, mind you)
>
> Uh, what? "pcc's libc"?
>
> Thor
>