3 ms·

none of this needs to be batteries-included, and there is no reason it cannot be done just as straightforwardly for C-family languages as it has been for Zig an

• estebank 11mo ago
  This is true of almost everything: it's not that Zig or Rust are unique on most features. Most of them have existed in one shape or another before. The praise they receive is because of the level of polish their design and implementation have and how they interact with their other features. There's no one stopping other projects from doing the same thing (modulo technical and organisational considerations), but they haven't yet, so it is reasonable to highlight them. If people talk about how good X is in language Y enough, people from language Z might notice and "steal" it. That's a good thing!
  • binary132 11mo ago
    I’m saying these things aren’t “language features” at all. I applaud their creation, but “batteries built in” has always seemed to me like a terrible design decision compared to “batteries provided” especially considering that many of these things would have been perfectly satisfactory generic tooling. Now we have people yapping about C++ not having a build system because they’re all habituated to a world where every language has its own, different build system built in.