←back to thread

Zig breaking change – Initial Writergate

(github.com)
228 points Retro_Dev | 1 comments | 04 Jul 25 04:11 UTC | HN request time: 0.204s | source
Show context
brabel ◴[04 Jul 25 06:33 UTC] No.44461708[source]▶
I like Zig but it seems to just keep redesigning itself, while other languages like Odin “shipped” long ago and don’t seem to need to look back. Is Zig suffering from perfectionism syndrome where things are never good enough??
replies(7): >>44461733 #>>44461743 #>>44461761 #>>44461828 #>>44461832 #>>44461929 #>>44470782 #
silisili ◴[04 Jul 25 06:39 UTC] No.44461733[source]▶
That's kinda my experience with watching Zig. It went from 'look how simple this is' to 'look at this new feature syntax' long ago.

People used to compare it as simpler than Rust. I don't agree that it's simple anymore at all.

None of this is meant to be badmouthing or insulting. I'm a polyglot but love simple languages and syntaxes, so I tend to overly notice such things.

replies(3): >>44461986 #>>44463325 #>>44463821 #
1. throwawaymaths ◴[04 Jul 25 12:09 UTC] No.44463821[source]▶
the only two new feature syntaxes in about six releases have been multiple iterations in for loops and continue in switches? maybe reified tuple types too (not just implicit) and destructuring tuples.

a few things have been removed, too. and async/suspend/nosuspend/await, usingnamesplace are headed for the woodchipper.