Maybe I'm not that deep into programming, but I don't understand the hype about Zig?
I programmed in rust a bit and can't say I'm an expert, but in my view rust mostly-solved the memory management problem at compile time and without a GC, and it works very well. The biggest con and cost I've always seen repeated so far is that "it's slow to compile", and I get that, if you're past 250 crates the final --release link tends to become noticeable, but there were improvements to incremental compilation.
On the other hand - looking at the syntax from this post - Zig feels a blend of javascript, python and golang syntax that still requires memory management. So a nicer-written C that inherits all the issues from C? From the post: no functional programming, data mutation, memory leak, double-free, memory corruption.
Personally I'd rather trade a couple minutes of final link every time when this is the other option.
Basically you pick the type safety that Modula-2 or Mesa already offered in the late 1970's, repackage it with comptime and more C like syntax, and have a whole legion of new devs jumping into it.
Note that AT&T, where UNIX and C were born, the language they were researching as C replacement was Cyclone, not something that is not much different.
Not everyone reads the same posts, and post 2000 younger generations need to be educated in what came first, what is actually new, and what is language adoption marketing.
Because it is a rip off, pretending nothing else has done it before, in fact it could even be called a PL/I ripoff for that matter, which predated C for about a decade, had already had all the bounds checking, proper strings and arrays, was actually used to deliver several IBM OSes, and is used to this day on z/OS. Certainly much larger production deployments than Zig.
Yes I will, as long as I am part of this realm, can be in HN, or whatever is the social media of the day, I started with BBS, USENET, Slashdot and plenty others.
plqbfbv · · focus · HN ↗
I programmed in rust a bit and can't say I'm an expert, but in my view rust mostly-solved the memory management problem at compile time and without a GC, and it works very well. The biggest con and cost I've always seen repeated so far is that "it's slow to compile", and I get that, if you're past 250 crates the final --release link tends to become noticeable, but there were improvements to incremental compilation.
On the other hand - looking at the syntax from this post - Zig feels a blend of javascript, python and golang syntax that still requires memory management. So a nicer-written C that inherits all the issues from C? From the post: no functional programming, data mutation, memory leak, double-free, memory corruption.
Personally I'd rather trade a couple minutes of final link every time when this is the other option.
pjmlp · · focus · HN ↗
Note that AT&T, where UNIX and C were born, the language they were researching as C replacement was Cyclone, not something that is not much different.
mi_lk · · focus · HN ↗
Seriously impressive that you’re going to repeat that until the end of time
pjmlp · · focus · HN ↗
Because it is a rip off, pretending nothing else has done it before, in fact it could even be called a PL/I ripoff for that matter, which predated C for about a decade, had already had all the bounds checking, proper strings and arrays, was actually used to deliver several IBM OSes, and is used to this day on z/OS. Certainly much larger production deployments than Zig.
Yes I will, as long as I am part of this realm, can be in HN, or whatever is the social media of the day, I started with BBS, USENET, Slashdot and plenty others.