3 ms·
> On the contrary I would not call Zig very C-like at all, and that's what makes the interoperability so impressive to me. Zig isn't C-like in its syntax or it
by quotemstr 1y ago
> On the contrary I would not call Zig very C-like at all, and that's what makes the interoperability so impressive to me.
Zig isn't C-like in its syntax or its developer experience (e.g. whether it has a package manager), but in its execution model: unsafe, imperative, deemphasizes objects, metaprogramming by token manipulation.
- matu3ba 1y agoPlease elaborate what "execution model" entails. What is the Rust "Abstract Machine"? I am only aware of the memory model, specifically pointer and consistency/synchronization which extends the C memory model by abstractions deemed "memory-safe" based on Separation Logic and Strict Aliasing. In my understanding you criticize Zig for not offering safety abstractions, because you can also write purely unsafe Rust also covered by the Rust "execution model". Rust has no inheritance typical for OOP. Zig has no token manipulation, but uses "comptime".