4 ms·

I maintain auto-generated bindings for my C libraries for Zig and Nim (and Odin and Rust - although the Rust bindings definitely need some love to make them a l

I maintain auto-generated bindings for my C libraries for Zig and Nim (and Odin and Rust - although the Rust bindings definitely need some love to make them a lot more idiomatic). I think looking at the examples (which is essentially the same code in different languages) gives you a high level idea, but they only scratch the surface when it comes to language features (for instance the Zig examples don't use any comptime features): Zig: https://github.com/floooh/sokol-zig/tree/master/src/examples https://github.com/floooh/sokol-zig/tree/master/src/examples Nim: https://github.com/floooh/sokol-nim/tree/master/examples https://github.com/floooh/sokol-nim/tree/master/examples Odin: https://github.com/floooh/sokol-odin/tree/main/examples https://github.com/floooh/sokol-odin/tree/main/examples Rust: https://github.com/floooh/sokol-rust/tree/main/examples https://github.com/floooh/sokol-rust/tree/main/examples

grok22 3y ago
And which language did you enjoy coding in the most? Yeah, a subjective question :-). (Edit: Missed the auto-generated part, so maybe you don't have an opinion on experience regarding this?)
- flohofwoe 3y ago
  I think actually Odin, although I was surprised by that (being more of a Zig fan). Odin has some neat convenience features which are nice for higher level code, while Zig can be a lot more 'draconian' by enforcing correctness even at the cost of some "line noise" (but I guess both languages are still in flux, so that might change). As for Nim I enjoyed it initially (because of the Python vibes I guess) but the automatic memory management gets confusing quickly. IIRC there's quite a few different reference types - but maybe that has been simplified in 2.0 PS: Even though the bindings are auto-generated, I still try to make them 'language-idiomatic' by injecting some 'semi-manual' mappings for things like naming conventions or implicit type conversions, ideally getting the API close to what a 'native' API would look like - at least that's the goal.
  - eterps 3y ago
    This might sound strange, but in my opinion Odin is a Pascal variant with a C like syntax.

grok22 3y ago

And which language did you enjoy coding in the most? Yeah, a subjective question :-). (Edit: Missed the auto-generated part, so maybe you don't have an opinion on experience regarding this?)

flohofwoe 3y ago
I think actually Odin, although I was surprised by that (being more of a Zig fan). Odin has some neat convenience features which are nice for higher level code, while Zig can be a lot more 'draconian' by enforcing correctness even at the cost of some "line noise" (but I guess both languages are still in flux, so that might change). As for Nim I enjoyed it initially (because of the Python vibes I guess) but the automatic memory management gets confusing quickly. IIRC there's quite a few different reference types - but maybe that has been simplified in 2.0 PS: Even though the bindings are auto-generated, I still try to make them 'language-idiomatic' by injecting some 'semi-manual' mappings for things like naming conventions or implicit type conversions, ideally getting the API close to what a 'native' API would look like - at least that's the goal.
- eterps 3y ago
  This might sound strange, but in my opinion Odin is a Pascal variant with a C like syntax.