1. 14

  2. 7

    link to my previous review of zig.

    With that out of the way, let me say that this looks like a huge milestone for the language. A lot of the gripes I had about the language look like they’re being addressed (e.g., cutting down on the number of sigils, generating documentation, etc.).

    Moving %return to try, for example, seems like a great decision to me. It elevates the return-type based error handling that zig has to use a similar vernacular as in exception-handling languages, but still keeping all the wonderful features of status-returns (plus it reduces the overloading of % which I deeply appreciate).

    I can’t wait for 0.2 to come out; I’ll love trying zig again.

    Oh and look! The docs are available online now! http://ziglang.org/documentation/0.1.1/ (I probably just missed this during the last release, but I’m so glad they’re available now!)

    Congrats to Andrew; keep up the good work!

    1. 3

      Andy did a twitch stream this afternoon about Zig’s compiler if anyone’s interested:


      1. 3

        Has anyone done a comparison of Zig to Rust? I use Rust a lot, and it looks like they’re targeting similar problems. Zig seems to be focused on being a direct replacement for C, while Rust seems to be more broad but still trying to stay at the systems level (replacement for C++, maybe?). I’d like to see the comparison of features that Rust has versus what Zig has (or wants to have). Oh, and how Nim fits in to this ecosystem, too!

        Zig is an interesting project, IMO. I’m interested to see what direction it takes compared to Nim and Rust.

        1. 3

          I think the “Rust is to C++ as Zig is to C” analogy is broadly accurate.

          imo, Rust and Zig are not really in direct competition- Zig places an emphasis on C interoperability and being consistent, small, and portable… Rust on correctness and compile time verifiable memory safety.

          It seems to me like Rust’s Big Idea is the borrow checker, and Zig’s is comptime, but I realize this is likely an oversimplification on both counts.

          I don’t know enough about Nim to comment on it.

        2. 2

          Excellent. I’m a big fan of this work, and I’ve been following (and sponsoring, not much but it’s a start) it since I found it, presumably via a link here some place :)

          1. 2

            I really appreciate the support. I hope to get to the point where I can work on it full time within the next 3 years.