4 ms·

Compiling to C source isn't planned for the reference Zig compiler, as far as I know. It's more interested in helping people moving people off of C (see `zig tr

• haberman 7y ago
  As a (part-time) C programmer, I wouldn't really consider a "C replacement" that can't compile to C. Part of the appeal of C is that it's easy to integrate into other projects, regardless of the build system or obscure hardware it might be targeting. If you require a compiler for a language few people have heard of (even a very cool language), it seriously limits your potential user-base. If you tell me that I can write better, safer code by using Zig, but I can also compile it into a .c artifact that anybody can use, now that is a tempting proposition!
  • pornel 7y ago
    Unless you really really need obscure platforms, just forget about it. Make the jump, don't look back. After you get a taste of a modern toolchain (with cross-compilation, dependency management, but withou not-quite-portable build files to endlessly fiddle with, without outdated compilers to work around), you will not want to have to compile a C file again. Languages like Zig and Rust are easy to install. Mostly it's just a tarball, so it's less of an inconvenience than getting the right version of autotools.
    • keithnz 7y ago
      its not obscure platforms, its a ton of embedded platforms (you may consider that obscure, but reality is there are millions and millions of devices out there running software on these "obscure" platforms), most of them don't have many options. At one stage I was writing write my own language to compile to C based around state machines and actors as so many devices tend to be some version (often badly implemented) of those two things. But I ended up moving out of the embedded world and kind of lost my prime motivation for doing it.
  • ant6n 7y ago
    I think three intention here is not the other way round. You can add c files to your zig project to make the transition, integration with existing code, as well as collaboration with c only programmers easier. After all zig wants to replace c, not the other way round.
  • yellowapple 7y ago
    > Part of the appeal of C is that it's easy to integrate into other projects, regardless of the build system or obscure hardware it might be targeting. Zig should be just as easy to integrate. Sure, it's one more thing to install, but it'll spit out .o files just like a C compiler would if you tell it to (which means you can shove it in your Makefile or what have you), and will spit out .h files for linking. You miss out on Zig's build system niceties that way, though (including the cross-compilation demonstrated in the article). Regardless, being a "C replacement" kinda implies (if not outright explies) that it's replacing C; compiling to C kinda defeats that purpose. It'd still be useful, though, and is probably possible (might even be relatively trivial if LLVM and/or Clang provide some mechanism to generate C from LLVM IR or some other intermediate representation).