2 ms·

I would quibble with all of the claims, other than easier to learn. I really see no advantage for Zig over Rust after you get past that 2 first two weeks.

• bbkane 8mo ago
  Coming from Go, I'm really disappointed in Rust compiler times. I realize they're comparable to C++, and you can structure your crates to minimize compile times, but I don't care. I want instant compilation. Zig is trying to get me instant compilation and I see that as a huge advantage for Zig (even past the first 2 weeks). I'll probably stick with Rust as my "low level language" due to its safety, type system, maturity, library ecosystem, and career opportunities. But I remain jealous of Zig's willingness to do extreme things to make compilation faster.
  • bombela 8mo ago
    On any Go production projects I worked on or near, the incremental compile time was slower than C++ and Rust. A full build was definitely much faster, but not as useful. Especially when using a build system with shared networked caching (Bazel for example). Yes those projects were a bloated mess, as it always seems to be.
    • bbkane 8mo ago
      Re: slower incremental compile times - not my experience, but interesting data point. I'll keep a look out for this.
  • samiv 8mo ago
    The key with c++ is to keep coding while compiling. Otherwise..yeah you're blocked.
    • pjmlp 8mo ago
      The key with C++ is to learn how to use the build system, make use of binary libraries, and if one can afford to use the very latest compiler versions, modules. And avoid header libraries, C++ isn't a scripting language.