←back to thread

Open-source Zig book

(www.zigbook.net)
692 points rudedogg | 1 comments | 16 Nov 25 19:44 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
poly2it ◴[17 Nov 25 06:14 UTC] No.45951222[source]▶
> Learning Zig is not just about adding a language to your resume. It is about fundamentally changing how you think about software.

I'm not sure what they expect, but to me Zig looks very much like C with a modern standard lib and slightly different syntax. This isn't groundbreaking, not a thought paradigm which should be that novel to most system engineers like for example OCaml could be. Stuff like this alienates people who want a technical justification for the use of a language.

replies(10): >>45951231 #>>45951258 #>>45951302 #>>45951388 #>>45951755 #>>45951799 #>>45951814 #>>45951964 #>>45952563 #>>45952740 #
userbinator ◴[17 Nov 25 06:17 UTC] No.45951231[source]▶
For those who actually want to learn languages which are "fundamentally changing how you think about software", I'd recommend the Lisp family and APL family.
replies(4): >>45951356 #>>45951479 #>>45951521 #>>45952626 #
miki123211 ◴[17 Nov 25 07:16 UTC] No.45951479[source]▶
Am I correct that you can essentially "learn APL without learning APL" by just learning Numpy / Pytorch?

I looked at array languages briefly, and my impression was that"ooh this is just Numpy but weirder."

replies(2): >>45951748 #>>45952458 #
1. veqq ◴[17 Nov 25 08:16 UTC] No.45951748[source]▶
Not even close. While Numpy has many similar operations, it lacks the terseness, concepts like trains and forks etc. Modern APL style doesn't use... control flow (neither recursion nor loops nor if...) and often avoids variables (tacit/point-free style).