Ah yes, the "you're holding it wrong" argument.

If other allocators are able to handle a situation perfectly well, even a general-purpose allocator like the one in glibc, that suggests that musl's is deficient.

glibc's allocator is about 10x more code than musl's. Why should it be controversial that different C stdlib implementations set different priorities?

A smaller code base also means a smaller attack surface and fewer potential bugs.

The question remains: why does the Rust ecosystem depend so much on a system component they ultimately have no control over?

[deleted]