On Sun, 23 Aug 2020, Jens Gustedt wrote:

> Looking into musl I found that the current implementation is basically
> doing verbatim what the C standard says, namely uses `snprintf` under
> the hood to do the formatting. This has obviously the disadvantage
> that this drags the whole infrastructure that is needed for `snprintf`
> into the executable.
> 
> Making some tests, I found that coding `asctime_r` straight forward
> with byte-copying has it shave off about 10k from the final
> executable.

Do I understand correctly that this 10k figure is for an "application"
that does not use stdio at all otherwise? If so, I believe that is a
quite unrealistic test — why would an application use asctime_r but then
avoid use of stdio to do something useful with the result?

Alexander