I think the libc people might argue this level of functionality is just outside the scope of libc. (Arguably, it is a mistake for DNS to be part of libc, given how complicated it is.)

▲

Someone 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

https://sourceware.org/glibc/ says

“The GNU C Library is designed to be a backwards compatible, portable, and high performance ISO C library. It aims to follow all relevant standards including ISO C11, POSIX.1-2008, and IEEE 754-2008.”

⇒ I don’t think they make that argument.

	▲	loeg 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		The standards make no requirement that an implementation be good, performant, or even useful.

▲

ComputerGuru 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

To be sure, complexity isn’t the determinator for whether something is or isn’t in scope for libc though.

	▲	loeg 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		Historically libcs have been leery of imposing threading on otherwise singlethreaded applications; and for similar reasons, try to minimize startup costs.