5 ms·

Zig is a cute but dead man walking project. Rust has gained traction and that's what ultimately matters.

fsloth 5y ago
"Dead man walking" is quite harsh. Zig is a one man passion project. Those are awesome. Rust is becoming and industrial scale tool. Those are awesome as well. However, each has their place. One man passion projects should not be used in anything mission critical. They totally should be used for fun, enjoyment and inspiration, and they may potentially grow to industry scale.
- Keyframe 5y ago
  A bit too harsh, I admit. Look at something in-between (project length / status-wise) like D. Similar story. Critical traction or a passion uphill road.
  - fsloth 5y ago
    Zig is still quite early. Not sure what eventual traction will be. As is there seems to be lots of love from lots of hacker / demo / oldschool types which may snowball into an industrial scale ecosystem in this or some parallel universe (i.e I would not bet either way just yet).
- est31 5y ago
  To be fair, Rust has been a one man passion project for a long time as well.
  - fsloth 5y ago
    Yes, many projects have started like that. Projects can grow and mature. But there really is no crystall ball for that and you should only choose existing industry scale tools for production projects.
    - est31 5y ago
      There is lots of valid criticism of Zig. The fact that it's run by a single person is not. hostapd is maintained by a single human. They are responsible for about 69% of all commits in the git repo, 55% if you look at the last year. It's still the most widely deployed WiFi implementation of the world. https://www.openhub.net/p/hostapd/contributors/summary https://www.openhub.net/p/hostapd/contributors/summary
      - fsloth 5y ago
        Changing WiFi stack is less of a problem than changing the implementation language. The perceived fragility of a an element of architecture should be inversely proportional to the effort of replacing the said module chosen. Large effort to replace an element (like the implementation languag) means the element should be of low fragility. This is not an argument against Zig or that it would not become an industrial scale tool. It just does not feel "lindyproof" yet for real work.
  - elygre 5y ago
    This was news to me. Could you explain a bit more, including if you think this is still the case, or when it stopped being so?
    - steveklabnik 5y ago
      It was for a few years at the start, but hasn't been since like, 2010.
    - est31 5y ago
      Rust used to be developed by Graydon Hoare for years until it became a team project. There is a rust-prehistory repo which shows this: https://github.com/graydon/rust-prehistory/graphs/contributors?from=2006-07-23&to=2010-06-27&type=c https://github.com/graydon/rust-prehistory/graphs/contributo... After the initial commit in the "group" repo, development of the language has switched to a team instead of a single person, with the introduction of additional contributors. This holds even if you only look at the pre-1.0 days which established the core concepts of the Rust language as it stands today (the original language when the team started to work on it was a bit different to 1.0). https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/graphs/contributors?from=2010-06-13&to=2015-05-10&type=c https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/graphs/contributors?from=2... The work since 1.0 can be classified as a massive refinement project, which also does not have a single leader. Zig on the other hand does have a single main contributor/maintainer/creator: https://github.com/ziglang/zig/graphs/contributors?from=2015-08-02&to=2021-05-22&type=c https://github.com/ziglang/zig/graphs/contributors?from=2015...
  - fsloth 5y ago
    But is _now_ an industrial scale tool. Any project can mature to industry scale, but a language needs to be currently industry scale for a current industry deployed project. You can't choose "possibly in the future" industry scale language for current project. Individual insight is often much better than a design by committee, but a language needs a quite robust ecosystem of support from industry bodies at some point to become a viable tool for generic industry scale development.
- jorangreef 5y ago
  Except, Zig is not "a one man passion project". Zig is newer than Rust, but the Zig Software Foundation was in fact founded before the Rust Foundation, and already employs several core members. For example, Jakub Konka who resigned from Microsoft to work for the ZSF (https://ziglang.org/news/jakub-konka-hired-full-time/ https://ziglang.org/news/jakub-konka-hired-full-time/), and whose linker was the first to enable cross-compilation to Apple Silicon, and is already making Rust's cross-compilation just work (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27245369 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27245369). Inspiring how such a young language can already be so far ahead when it comes to something as vital as the compile chain.
  - steveklabnik 5y ago
    > Funny how the "toy" is ahead of the "industrial scale tool" when it comes to something as basic as the compile chain. It's not funny if you understand the relative priorities of the two teams. Rust tends to prioritize working with the system, so all of our default configurations use the system linker. Zig doesn't have the same constraints. This feature is awesome, and I would love to see it in Rust as well, but like, it's not surprising.
    - jorangreef 5y ago
      "just trying to score internet points" No, Zig absolutely has an awesome compiler. It's not "a toy" or a "one man passion project" and it's condescending to reduce it to those terms, as if it is not also somehow "industrial scale".
      - steveklabnik 5y ago
        I absolutely agree that it is awesome. That doesn't mean that returning condescension with more of it is helping the conversation, or getting said awesome compiler the respect it deserves.
        jorangreef 5y ago
        Thanks Steve, how would you rather that I reword the comparison in that last sentence? Let me know and I'll make the edit. To be fair, your comment would also be better served without the insinuation of "just trying to score internet points".

"Dead man walking" is quite harsh. Zig is a one man passion project. Those are awesome. Rust is becoming and industrial scale tool. Those are awesome as well. However, each has their place. One man passion projects should not be used in anything mission critical. They totally should be used for fun, enjoyment and inspiration, and they may potentially grow to industry scale.

Keyframe 5y ago
A bit too harsh, I admit. Look at something in-between (project length / status-wise) like D. Similar story. Critical traction or a passion uphill road.
- fsloth 5y ago
  Zig is still quite early. Not sure what eventual traction will be. As is there seems to be lots of love from lots of hacker / demo / oldschool types which may snowball into an industrial scale ecosystem in this or some parallel universe (i.e I would not bet either way just yet).
est31 5y ago
To be fair, Rust has been a one man passion project for a long time as well.
- fsloth 5y ago
  Yes, many projects have started like that. Projects can grow and mature. But there really is no crystall ball for that and you should only choose existing industry scale tools for production projects.
  - est31 5y ago
    There is lots of valid criticism of Zig. The fact that it's run by a single person is not. hostapd is maintained by a single human. They are responsible for about 69% of all commits in the git repo, 55% if you look at the last year. It's still the most widely deployed WiFi implementation of the world. https://www.openhub.net/p/hostapd/contributors/summary https://www.openhub.net/p/hostapd/contributors/summary
    - fsloth 5y ago
      Changing WiFi stack is less of a problem than changing the implementation language. The perceived fragility of a an element of architecture should be inversely proportional to the effort of replacing the said module chosen. Large effort to replace an element (like the implementation languag) means the element should be of low fragility. This is not an argument against Zig or that it would not become an industrial scale tool. It just does not feel "lindyproof" yet for real work.
- elygre 5y ago
  This was news to me. Could you explain a bit more, including if you think this is still the case, or when it stopped being so?
  - steveklabnik 5y ago
    It was for a few years at the start, but hasn't been since like, 2010.
  - est31 5y ago
    Rust used to be developed by Graydon Hoare for years until it became a team project. There is a rust-prehistory repo which shows this: https://github.com/graydon/rust-prehistory/graphs/contributors?from=2006-07-23&to=2010-06-27&type=c https://github.com/graydon/rust-prehistory/graphs/contributo... After the initial commit in the "group" repo, development of the language has switched to a team instead of a single person, with the introduction of additional contributors. This holds even if you only look at the pre-1.0 days which established the core concepts of the Rust language as it stands today (the original language when the team started to work on it was a bit different to 1.0). https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/graphs/contributors?from=2010-06-13&to=2015-05-10&type=c https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/graphs/contributors?from=2... The work since 1.0 can be classified as a massive refinement project, which also does not have a single leader. Zig on the other hand does have a single main contributor/maintainer/creator: https://github.com/ziglang/zig/graphs/contributors?from=2015-08-02&to=2021-05-22&type=c https://github.com/ziglang/zig/graphs/contributors?from=2015...
- fsloth 5y ago
  But is _now_ an industrial scale tool. Any project can mature to industry scale, but a language needs to be currently industry scale for a current industry deployed project. You can't choose "possibly in the future" industry scale language for current project. Individual insight is often much better than a design by committee, but a language needs a quite robust ecosystem of support from industry bodies at some point to become a viable tool for generic industry scale development.
jorangreef 5y ago
Except, Zig is not "a one man passion project". Zig is newer than Rust, but the Zig Software Foundation was in fact founded before the Rust Foundation, and already employs several core members. For example, Jakub Konka who resigned from Microsoft to work for the ZSF (https://ziglang.org/news/jakub-konka-hired-full-time/ https://ziglang.org/news/jakub-konka-hired-full-time/), and whose linker was the first to enable cross-compilation to Apple Silicon, and is already making Rust's cross-compilation just work (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27245369 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27245369). Inspiring how such a young language can already be so far ahead when it comes to something as vital as the compile chain.
- steveklabnik 5y ago
  > Funny how the "toy" is ahead of the "industrial scale tool" when it comes to something as basic as the compile chain. It's not funny if you understand the relative priorities of the two teams. Rust tends to prioritize working with the system, so all of our default configurations use the system linker. Zig doesn't have the same constraints. This feature is awesome, and I would love to see it in Rust as well, but like, it's not surprising.
  - jorangreef 5y ago
    "just trying to score internet points" No, Zig absolutely has an awesome compiler. It's not "a toy" or a "one man passion project" and it's condescending to reduce it to those terms, as if it is not also somehow "industrial scale".
    - steveklabnik 5y ago
      I absolutely agree that it is awesome. That doesn't mean that returning condescension with more of it is helping the conversation, or getting said awesome compiler the respect it deserves.
      - jorangreef 5y ago
        Thanks Steve, how would you rather that I reword the comparison in that last sentence? Let me know and I'll make the edit. To be fair, your comment would also be better served without the insinuation of "just trying to score internet points".