Zig is hard but worth it

I get what Zig is going for in making all operations as explicit as possible, but I fear that it's going to turn away fields like graphics and game development where it would be a good fit except for the lack of operator overloading forcing you to go back to C-style math function spaghetti. It's all fun and games until what should be a straightforward math expression turns into 8 nested function calls.

Zig has a builtin @Vector type that might come in handy for most cases where in C++ a math library with operator overloading would be used:

https://www.godbolt.org/z/7zbxnncv6

...maybe one day there will also be a @Matrix builtin.

Probably not. @Vector is not a mathematical vector, it's SIMD. it makes sense because there are times when those live in registers and a poly fill for stack memory isn't burdensome.

@Matrix makes less sense because when it gets big, where are you getting memory from?

For 'game-ey' math code, a matrix is at most 4x4 floats (64 bytes), that's fine for a value type that might live on the stack.

vec2..4 and matching matrix types up to 4x4 is basically also what's provided in GPU shading languages as primitive types, and personally I would prefer such a set of "SIMD-y" primitive types for Zig (maybe a bit more luxurious than @Vector, e.g. with things like component swizzling syntax - basically what this Clang extension offers: https://clang.llvm.org/docs/LanguageExtensions.html#vectors-...).