←back to thread

Things Zig comptime won't do

(matklad.github.io)
458 points JadedBlueEyes | 1 comments | 20 Apr 25 15:57 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
no_wizard ◴[20 Apr 25 16:53 UTC] No.43744932[source]▶
I like the Zig language and tooling. I do wish there was a safety mode that give the same guarantees as Rust, but it’s a huge step above C/C++. I am also extremely impressed with the Zig compiler.

Perhaps the safety is the tradeoff with the comparative ease of using the language compared to Rust, but I’d love the best of both worlds if it were possible

replies(5): >>43744960 #>>43745201 #>>43745418 #>>43745573 #>>43749228 #
hermanradtke ◴[20 Apr 25 16:59 UTC] No.43744960[source]▶
I wish for “strict” mode as well. My current thinking:

TypeScript is to JavaScript

as

Zig is to C

I am a huge TS fan.

replies(1): >>43745224 #
rc00 ◴[20 Apr 25 17:42 UTC] No.43745224[source]▶
Is Zig aiming to extend C or extinguish it? The embrace story is well-established at this point but the remainder is often unclear in the messaging from the community.
replies(3): >>43745439 #>>43745808 #>>43746440 #
1. PaulRobinson ◴[20 Apr 25 19:08 UTC] No.43745808[source]▶
It's improved C.

C interop is very important, and very valuable. However, by removing undefined behaviours, replacing macros that do weird things with well thought-through comptime, and making sure that the zig compiler is also a c compiler, you get a nice balance across lots of factors.

It's a great language, I encourage people to dig into it.