neckbeards

3 ms·

1.
by neckbeards 11mo ago
I'm curious to see how Zig approaches the hard problems and hopeful it produces something remarkable enough to make me jump ship (like Rust has for some of my projects). I'm not trying to change your mind either; I'm just try
2.
by neckbeards 11mo ago
Thanks for the response. I look forward to seeing how the type system evolves. - No hidden allocations: Other languages already provide abstractions for this. Are hidden allocations really a significant issue in modern systems languages, ev
3.
by neckbeards 11mo ago
Ok, thanks! Appreciate your time and it’s awesome to see the TigerBeetle team solving hard problems in OLTP while giving back.
4.
by neckbeards 11mo ago
I don't know. I don’t doubt that TigerBeetle’s hardest correctness challenges can’t be solved by language alone. TigerBeetle has impressive guarantees! Those are inherently systems-design problems. But the language defines the failure
5.
by neckbeards 11mo ago
It's a bit of both! I’d love feedback from someone more experienced with Zig, especially if there’s any flaw in my reasoning here. The programming language is part of the system design. The abstractions, invariants and guarantees the l
6.
by neckbeards 11mo ago
How is Zig considered “90% safe”? It relies on manual memory management, its simple type system provides limited compile-time guarantees and it lacks a mature concurrency model (making safe parallelism difficult). Given these gaps, I strugg
7.
by neckbeards 11mo ago
jorangreef: Could you elaborate on what aspects of Zig made it the preferred choice for TigerBeetle compared to C++? I understand the C type system has limitations. I’m particularly interested as I’ve encountered similar challenges with int
8.
by neckbeards 1y ago
This isn’t intended as flamebait. I’m trying to understand Zig’s long-term positioning and design philosophy. I have serious confusion about the type of problems Zig is aiming to solve. In my view, Zig is not solving the actual hard problem