4 ms·
> I think of Zig as a very developer friendly, powerful, fast, fun, low level language, without the strict safety guardrails of rust. Whenever I read something
by mustache_kimono 4y ago
> I think of Zig as a very developer friendly, powerful, fast, fun, low level language, without the strict safety guardrails of rust.
Whenever I read something like this, I think: "Why is it some people will dream up niches for other languages to fill that are about people not liking Rust?" It's interesting if only because it seems lots of people really like writing Rust. Have these people tried Rust? Shouldn't Zig stand on its own -- "Zig is better because it solves X and Y" or even some matter ease or style "Zig makes it easier to X and Y which is important for WASI apps"?
- xtian 4y agoZig does stand on its own https://ziglang.org/learn/why_zig_rust_d_cpp/ https://ziglang.org/learn/why_zig_rust_d_cpp/
- mustache_kimono 4y agoExactly. "Zig: Because [these good reasons] for WASI/WASM" or even "I just prefer Zig to Rust" is a much better argument. My point was only -- "Zig: Because people don't like writing Rust" is kind of a weird case to make, when lots and lots of people seem to like writing Rust.
- googlryas 4y agoThere's masochists in the world. A lot of people enjoy writing C++.
- mustache_kimono 4y ago"Why didn't you just write this in C++?" == "But can't we be miserable forever?"
- pjmlp 4y agoI do, despite its warts, because as polyglot developer I am able to use mixed code bases, so I get all the safety I need from managed languages, and only use C++ for what would be anyway unsafe code blocks. .NET + C++/CLI, Java/Kotlin + JNI/NDK, JavaScript + C++ addons, and so on. Many developers get lost trying to use an hammer for every nail.