Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Zig's Lovely Syntax

matklad.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 246 posts

Re: Zig's Lovely Syntax

#71

Post by johnisgood »

qcnguy wrote: post #56

Weird the author finds it lovely and compares to Kotlin, but doesn't find Kotlin superior. Kotlin invested heavily in a really nice curly brace syntax. It is actually the nicest out there. In every point the author makes, it feels like Kotlin did it the same or better. For example: 1. Integer literals. "var a = 1" doesn't work, seems absurd. In Kotlin literals do have strong types, but coercion is allowed when defini…

It is not just syntax that matters. For one I dislike JVM-based languages. I still write it sometimes for work.

Re: Zig's Lovely Syntax

#72

Post by AnimalMuppet »

bscphil wrote: post #12

> Like Rust, Zig uses 'name' (':' Type)? syntax for ascribing types, which is better than Type 'name' I'm definitely an outlier on this given the direction all syntactically C-like new languages have taken, but I have the opposite preference. I find that the most common reason I go back to check a variable declaration is to determine the type of the variable, and the harder it is to visually find that, the more annoy…

I, too, go back up the code to find the type of a variable. But I see the opposite problem: if the type is first, then it becomes harder to find the line that declares the variable I'm interested in, because the variable name isn't first. It's after the type, and the type could be "int" or it could be "struct Frobnosticator". That is, the variable name is after a variable-length type, so I have to keep bouncing left to right to find the start of the variable name.

Re: Zig's Lovely Syntax

#73

Post by throwawaymaths »

lvl155 wrote: post #46

Zig is just fun to write. And to me, it’s actually what I wish Rust was like. Rust is a great language, and no one’s going to argue that point but writing Zig for the first time was so refreshing. That said, Rust is now basically default for systems and Zig came too late.

never underestimate second mover advantage. if zig gets static borrow checking, it would be amazing

Re: Zig's Lovely Syntax

#75

Post by veber-alex »

jmull wrote: post #58
pton_xd wrote: post #8

"Zig doesn’t have lambdas" This surprises me (as a C++ guy). I use lambdas everywhere. What's the standard way of say defining a comparator when sorting an array in Zig?

You can declare an anonymous struct that has a function and reference that function inline (if you want). There's a little more syntax than a dedicated language feature, but not a lot more. What's "missing" in zig that lambda implementations normally have is capturing. In zig that's typically accomplished with a context parameter, again typically a struct.

So basically, Zig doesn't have lambdas, but because you still need lambdas, you need to reinvent the wheel each time you need it?

Why don't they just add lambdas?

Re: Zig's Lovely Syntax

#76

Post by Blackarea »

IshKebab wrote: post #64
z_open wrote: post #54

> Raw or multiline strings are spelled like this: const still_raw = \\const raw = \\ \\Roses are red \\ \\ Violets are blue, \\ \\Sugar is sweet \\ \\ And so are you. \\ \\ \\; \\ ; This syntax seems fairly insane to me.

Maybe if you've never tried formatting a traditional multiline string (e.g. in Python, C++ or Rust) before. If it isn't obvious, the problem is that you can't indent them properly because the indentation becomes part of the string itself. Some languages have magical "removed the indent" modes for strings (e.g. YAML) but they generally suck and just add confusion. This syntax is quite clear (at least with respect to i…

We can just use a crate for that and don't have to have this horrible comment like style that brings its own category of problems. https://docs.rs/indoc/latest/indoc/

Re: Zig's Lovely Syntax

#77

Post by hardwaregeek »

z_open wrote: post #54

> Raw or multiline strings are spelled like this: const still_raw = \\const raw = \\ \\Roses are red \\ \\ Violets are blue, \\ \\Sugar is sweet \\ \\ And so are you. \\ \\ \\; \\ ; This syntax seems fairly insane to me.

My immediate thought was hmm, that's weird but pretty nice. The indentation problem indeed sucks and with a halfway decent syntax highlighter you can probably de-emphasize the `//` and make it less visually cluttered.

Re: Zig's Lovely Syntax

#78

Post by nromiun »

IshKebab wrote: post #66
nromiun wrote: post #28

I like Zig as well, but I won't call its syntax lovely. Go shows you can do pretty well without ; for line breaks, without : for variable types etc. But sure, if you only compare it with Rust, it is a big improvement.

Removing stuff doesn't necessarily make the syntax better, otherwise we'd all use Lisp and the space bar wouldn't exist: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scriptio_continua

True. But my point is that adding stuff doesn't necessarily make the syntax better either. Otherwise we would all be using Perl by now. The sweet spot is somewhere in the middle.

Re: Zig's Lovely Syntax

#79

Post by n42 »

z_open wrote: post #69
IshKebab wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe if you've never tried formatting a traditional multiline string (e.g. in Python, C++ or Rust) before. If it isn't obvious, the problem is that you can't indent them properly because the indentation becomes part of the string itself. Some languages have magical "removed the indent" modes for strings (e.g. YAML) but they generally suck and just add confusion. This syntax is quite clear (at least with respect to i…

Even if we ignore solutions other languages have come up with, it's even worse that they landed on // for the syntax given that it's apparently used the same way for real comments.

> it's even worse that they landed on // for the syntax

.. it is using \\

Re: Zig's Lovely Syntax

#80

Post by n42 »

z_open wrote: post #54

> Raw or multiline strings are spelled like this: const still_raw = \\const raw = \\ \\Roses are red \\ \\ Violets are blue, \\ \\Sugar is sweet \\ \\ And so are you. \\ \\ \\; \\ ; This syntax seems fairly insane to me.

Zig does not really try to appeal to window shoppers. this is one of those controversial decisions that, once you become comfortable with the language by using it, you learn to appreciate.

spoken as someone who found the syntax offensive when I first learned it.

Post reply on HN