I’d like to point out, the value add of Rust isn’t speed, it’s safety in a low-level language. C is also just as fast, it’s just that Rust guarantees safety in a wide class of potential catastrophic bugs with little to no runtime overhead, by using the design of the language and compiler.
Rust: it will take 10 months to build the app you want, but it will run super fast.
Zig: it will take 10 days to build the app you want, but it will run super fast.
You get to pick one cult. Which one is it?
I’d like to point out, the value add of Rust isn’t speed, it’s safety in a low-level language. C is also just as fast, it’s just that Rust guarantees safety in a wide class of potential catastrophic bugs with little to no runtime overhead, by using the design of the language and compiler.
Rust: works
Zig: segmentation fault
Also no higher-order functions like map, filter, reduce etc.
Really weird design decision for a brand new language.
Comptime is pretty dope tho, I wish Rust had that instead of relying on macros so much.
So how is Zig different from C or C++, then?
Much nicer than C, much simpler than C++, much less cruft than both.
Rust has cute crab
Zig has scary lizard
Zig isn’t even v1 and without any API stability guarantees.
It finished even faster when it crashes right?
I dunno man… having “no macros” as a selling point?
Never heard of zig before, thanks