8 ms·
> Uber does not have any plans to use zig-the-language yet. I would say that Uber uses the Zig toolchain, title is a bit misleading as I thought that Uber uses
by colesantiago 4y ago
> Uber does not have any plans to use zig-the-language yet.
I would say that Uber uses the Zig toolchain, title is a bit misleading as I thought that Uber uses Zig (the language)
- kristoff_it 4y agoThe title is as misleading as you want it to be, Zig (the language) is famous for not being yet stable, did you really expect Uber to use it in production? edit: I just realized that maybe you were referring to the HN title. The real title is "How Uber Uses Zig" but HN cut the "How", making the title seem a stronger statement that what it's intended to be.
- Kiro 4y agoI hate HN's automatic title parsing. I get offended every time I post something and the title is automatically converted to something unintended.
- ntoskrnl 4y agoSomeone should write a blog post called "How changing titles makes Hacker News worse"
- gibolt 4y agoIt's quite comical how the auto formatter would make that factual, by removing the 'How' :)
- lmm 4y agoIt's worse than that, it's a manual process but done by people acting like robots.
- Kiro 4y agoNo, it happens immediately so there's some algorithm in the works. Mods also change titles manually but that's a different issue.
- avgcorrection 4y ago> The title is as misleading as you want it to be, Zig (the language) is famous for not being yet stable, did you really expect Uber to use it in production? You seem a bit confrontational considering your role. The Uber title would have been more clear if it said "How Uber Uses zig(1)". No, I don't expect capital-Z Zig to mean the compiler but not the language itself.
- kristoff_it 4y agoZig is a programming language and toolchain, it's on the website. Uber is not only using the compiler but also the linker.
- scottlamb 4y agoI'd expect most people to read "Zig is a general-purpose programming language and toolchain" as saying Zig has a toolchain for compiling itself, which is unremarkable. The idea that an experimental language's toolchain might be superior at (cross-)compiling and linking C than gcc or clang is not obvious and isn't described that well on the front page. I see the "Maintain it with Zig" section has a bullet point about this, but it's not that prominent IMHO and doesn't say why. I heard elsewhere how great Zig is for cross-compiling C. (Easily targeting arbitrary glibc versions is a great feature!) IMHO, you'd be wise to consider this paragraph avgcorrection wrote: > You seem a bit confrontational considering your role. Not everyone opening up an article on HN will have the context you do that Zig is an experimental language, that it has a toolchain that can do this, etc. Maybe look at how you can work on that rather than say stuff like "The title is as misleading as you want it to be"?
- kristoff_it 4y ago> Not everyone opening up an article on HN will have the context you do that Zig is an experimental language, that it has a toolchain that can do this, etc. Maybe look at how you can work on that rather than say stuff like "The title is as misleading as you want it to be"? All this stuff is mentioned in the blog post itself, some of it even in the opening TLDR.
- yjftsjthsd-h 4y ago> Zig (the language) is famous for not being yet stable, did you really expect Uber to use it in production? Yes, easily. If Uber has a reputation for valuing stability over new shiny tech, I've never head it.
- cultofmetatron 4y agohaha its hilarious but true that zig is really an amazing c compiler build system that happens to include an alternative safer c like language.