3 ms·

I think it is a big improvement, on the axes that matter most for low-level programming. In fact, Zig is so revolutionary (rather than evolutionary) that its po

by pron 4y ago

I think it is a big improvement, on the axes that matter most for low-level programming. In fact, Zig is so revolutionary (rather than evolutionary) that its power is sometimes missed on first glance.

pjmlp 4y ago
If we look from the point of view of comptime and having a more curly friendly syntax for C folks, maybe.
- pron 4y ago
  Sure, comptime, comptime introspection, comptime type generation, incremental compilation, basically the most important things for low-level programming.
  - pjmlp 4y ago
    Many low level programming languages don't have them, including C, so while a nice feature, I don't see it as a killer feature, more like a nice to have.
    - pron 4y ago
      C doesn't have the abstraction abilities of languages like C++ while Zig does, thanks to this feature. This is more than an exponential increase in expressivity (i.e. there are Zig programs that would take exponentially more code in C).
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]