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

TigerBeetle and Synadia pledge $512k to the Zig Software Foundation

tigerbeetle.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 213 posts

Re: TigerBeetle and Synadia pledge $512k to the Zig Software Foundation

#91

Post by api »

GuB-42 wrote: post #88
vatsachakrvthy wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not kneeling it's literally just eliminating bugs. It's kind of like saying that we kneel to logic while doing math

The problem I have with what I call "bondage and discipline" languages is that while it has value making sure the code is correct, it is not pleasant (for me) to work with. Sometimes I just want to try out stuff, I know there is a bug, in fact, it breaks everything, but that's exactly what I want, I will revert it once my little expertement is complete. Strict languages will refuse to run anything unless you make sur…

Experiments very often become production and now you have security holes and technical debt.

Re: TigerBeetle and Synadia pledge $512k to the Zig Software Foundation

#92

Post by drfuchs »

ncruces wrote: post #73
drfuchs wrote: post #9

Real programmers would have donated $524,288. But seriously good news nonetheless.

You can chip in remainder in soft monthly installments of $512 over two years.

Indeed. Take a gander at the last screenful of ziglang.org

Re: TigerBeetle and Synadia pledge $512k to the Zig Software Foundation

#93

Post by IshKebab »

jandrewrogers wrote: post #82
gorjusborg wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Zig feels like a better C with modern tooling. It is a tool that works for me. Rust feels like a better C++ with modern tooling. I am a tool that works for it.

Rust needs stronger compile-time features and capabilities if it wants to be a better C++. This is critical functionality for many types of safety.

Are you trying to claim that Rust isn't safer than C++ for some kind of safety? I can't really see how you would argue that. It's memory safe, and it has a much stronger type system which reduces the chance of non-memory safety bugs. What type of safety are you thinking of?

Re: TigerBeetle and Synadia pledge $512k to the Zig Software Foundation

#94

Post by IshKebab »

tkz1312 wrote: post #26
tayo42 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>leaving Rust for Zig for the sheer enjoyment of using it instead. What do people find more enjoyable?

Zig is orders of magnitude more pleasant and enjoyable to use than Rust.

I strongly disagree. I can see why you would want to use Zig, especially if you absolutely need complete low level code and only care about pretty decent memory safety (which is valid in many scenarios). But if those don't apply Rust is much nicer.

Stuff like string manipulation is almost as painful as it is in C.

Re: TigerBeetle and Synadia pledge $512k to the Zig Software Foundation

#95

Post by orochimaaru »

jandrewrogers wrote: post #82
gorjusborg wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Zig feels like a better C with modern tooling. It is a tool that works for me. Rust feels like a better C++ with modern tooling. I am a tool that works for it.

Rust needs stronger compile-time features and capabilities if it wants to be a better C++. This is critical functionality for many types of safety.

Would you be able to elaborate on some specific ones? I’m just curious. My space is mainly data engineering and Rust is making major moves there along with the entire Python ecosystem.

Rust’s main point is memory safety which is why it’s also a preferred language to reengineer cryptography libraries.

I’m interested in the embedded space (along with AI applications) and believe rust will be a language of choice for the entire toolchain here.

So I’m definitely interested in what gaps you see.

Re: TigerBeetle and Synadia pledge $512k to the Zig Software Foundation

#96

Post by the__alchemist »

IshKebab wrote: post #94
tkz1312 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Zig is orders of magnitude more pleasant and enjoyable to use than Rust.

I strongly disagree. I can see why you would want to use Zig, especially if you absolutely need complete low level code and only care about pretty decent memory safety (which is valid in many scenarios). But if those don't apply Rust is much nicer. Stuff like string manipulation is almost as painful as it is in C.

As far as I can tell, Zig's niche compared to Rust is to specifically cater to certain design patterns that C and C++ support, but other languages don't. E.g., anything that uses pointer manipulation for business logic.

Re: TigerBeetle and Synadia pledge $512k to the Zig Software Foundation

#97

Post by gethly »

mikkupikku wrote: post #31
gethly wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I heard that very recently in a movie, just cannot recall which one.

It's popularly claimed to be a Navy SEAL saying. I have no idea if that's true, but I think it has some broad merit to many things, almost anything which benefits from careful planning or training. In this context, throwing a big lump sum of money all at once could pressure the developers to spend money / hire too fast without careful planning. Spreading the payments out could be the donor's way of saying they don't…

sounds like the good old "rabbit vs turtle".

Re: TigerBeetle and Synadia pledge $512k to the Zig Software Foundation

#98

Post by [deleted] »

anymouse123456 wrote: post #42
tayo42 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>leaving Rust for Zig for the sheer enjoyment of using it instead. What do people find more enjoyable?

They aren't even close. Trying to write Rust as a noob feels like being in a blackout swamp, waist deep in muck, fighting through thick air and trying, but failing to run from danger. Being utterly constrained in every direction. Writing Zig as a noob feels like having the clouds part to reveal a bright, sunny Spring clearing and suddenly being able to cover land in a cheerful group with clarity, purpose and focus. […

[deleted]

Re: TigerBeetle and Synadia pledge $512k to the Zig Software Foundation

#99

Post by dafelst »

jandrewrogers wrote: post #81
jtrueb wrote: post #46

The reason for not choosing Rust still doesn't make any sense to me. If you don’t want to OOM, need correctness, are following the power of ten (where you aren’t allocating anyways), I don’t see the conflict or harm of additional enforced correctness. Also, Rust does support checked arithmetic and has stable toolchains.

Several types of correctness are more difficult to enforce in Rust than in some other languages due to its relatively weak compile-time facilities. Modern database engines don't allocate memory at runtime, aren't multithreaded, they explicitly schedule ownership, etc. They also use the types of data structures and patterns that give the borrow checker fits. Rust's correctness capabilities are relatively less valuable…

Can you elaborate a little more on what structures and patterns those are? I have built some database like things in rust (lots of zero copy and slice shenanigans, and heavily multi-threaded) and while it was tricky in some spots I haven't run into anything I have had to substantially compromise on.

Your use cases are likely more complex, so I'm curious what I should be looking out for.

Re: TigerBeetle and Synadia pledge $512k to the Zig Software Foundation

#100

Post by GuB-42 »

api wrote: post #91
GuB-42 wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem I have with what I call "bondage and discipline" languages is that while it has value making sure the code is correct, it is not pleasant (for me) to work with. Sometimes I just want to try out stuff, I know there is a bug, in fact, it breaks everything, but that's exactly what I want, I will revert it once my little expertement is complete. Strict languages will refuse to run anything unless you make sur…

Experiments very often become production and now you have security holes and technical debt.

Yes, that's a tradeoff, bondage and discipline languages like Ada and Rust are popular in some fields for a reason.

What I like the most is a middle ground: have a language that it permissive when it comes to generating code, but be strict with warnings. Again, problem is that too many people don't care about warnings. Way too many times, I had people call me to investigate their bugs, see a warning, point it out and tell them "here, that's your bug".

Post reply on HN