> The lack of string handling routines in the stdlib was unexpected, to concatenate strings one has to do everything manually - allocate the buffer, put strings there
Not sure how long the author spent looking at zig stdlib, but there is std.mem.join for this. Most string utils are under std.mem, it seems. To be fair, I also rolled my own std.mem.eql for string comparison before stumbling upon it as a beginner, so this definitely an area for improvement.
Overall I agree with the assessment about stdlib docs. Many things are not even listed in docs, and many that are have little to no description. Also some of type signatures are not really clear, e.g. when they use `var` as a type.
What works for me is having stdlib docs and source code from github side by side and jumping back and forth between them.
But overall, as someone who's gone through a similar language evaluation process, his assessment feels pretty on point: zig's lack of maturity still shows in a lot of places, Rust feels complicated and puzzling at the beginning, etc. My only difference is I'd lean towards C if I had to pick between it and C++, but that's largely a matter of personal preferences IMHO.