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

Zig – io_uring and Grand Central Dispatch std.Io implementations landed

ziglang.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 315 posts

Re: Zig – io_uring and Grand Central Dispatch std.Io implementations landed

#11

Post by norman784 »

gethly wrote: post #2

[flagged]

I have my doubts on Jai, besides being built towards game development, from what I read/watched about it, it has 2 or 3 meta programming capabilities, like comptime, macros, etc it feels too much of the same, also Jai is not built towards correctness or safety, John mentality is that he knows what he is doing, so he doesn’t need those guardrails and he wants instead expressiveness.

Also Jai is like C++ in complexity, while Zig is similar to C, very simple language.

Carbon is vaporware so far, there’s no language that could be used yet, because they first need to solve the C++ interop and fast compilation times, that is what will shape the language, so no one is using it, because it doesn’t exist yet.

Re: Zig – io_uring and Grand Central Dispatch std.Io implementations landed

#12

Post by SSLy »

interstice wrote: post #8
BonusPlay wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead of debating for years (like other languages), zig just tries things out. Worst case you can always rollback changes. IMO best APIs and designs are those that are battle tested by end users, not won in an argument war during committee meetings. This makes zig unique. It's fun to use and it stays fresh. You can always just stay on older version of zig. But if you choose to update to newer version, you get new t…

This is my favourite way to iterate, but the hard lesson is at some point after trying a bunch of things comes the Big Cleanup (tm). Is that a potential issue for this with Zig?

0.16's IO API changes might be that cleanup.

Re: Zig – io_uring and Grand Central Dispatch std.Io implementations landed

#14

Post by ofalkaed »

norman784 wrote: post #11
gethly wrote: post #2

[flagged]

I have my doubts on Jai, besides being built towards game development, from what I read/watched about it, it has 2 or 3 meta programming capabilities, like comptime, macros, etc it feels too much of the same, also Jai is not built towards correctness or safety, John mentality is that he knows what he is doing, so he doesn’t need those guardrails and he wants instead expressiveness. Also Jai is like C++ in complexity,…

>Also Jai is like C++ in complexity, while Zig is similar to C, very simple language.

And most importantly, Zig is aiming at being a C++ replacement with the simplicity of C, it is not trying to replace C.

Re: Zig – io_uring and Grand Central Dispatch std.Io implementations landed

#15

Post by WJW »

gethly wrote: post #2

[flagged]

Kinda weird to blame Zig for not being at 1.0 yet while Jai is still in closed beta after 11 years. Meanwhile Zig is being in used in big-ish projects all over while Jai has... a single game engine? Jai looks cool but it's far far FAR behind and losing ground.

Re: Zig – io_uring and Grand Central Dispatch std.Io implementations landed

#16

Post by ofalkaed »

gethly wrote: post #2

[flagged]

Being at 0.16 right now does not mean much. From what I gather, he is more focused on the semantics right now and trying to avoid getting bitten by a lack of foresight down the road, as most every language is. Things will probably start moving more quickly as the language solidifies.

Re: Zig – io_uring and Grand Central Dispatch std.Io implementations landed

#18

Post by pjmlp »

ofalkaed wrote: post #14
norman784 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have my doubts on Jai, besides being built towards game development, from what I read/watched about it, it has 2 or 3 meta programming capabilities, like comptime, macros, etc it feels too much of the same, also Jai is not built towards correctness or safety, John mentality is that he knows what he is doing, so he doesn’t need those guardrails and he wants instead expressiveness. Also Jai is like C++ in complexity,…

>Also Jai is like C++ in complexity, while Zig is similar to C, very simple language. And most importantly, Zig is aiming at being a C++ replacement with the simplicity of C, it is not trying to replace C.

Good luck with that, it is basically Modula-2 with C like syntax, and we aren't even getting into the whole ecosystem that it is missing on.

Any C++ or C replacement will need to win the earths of mainstream OS and game console vendors, otherwise it will remain yet another wannabe candidate.

Those have already their own languages, alongside their own C and C++ compilers, and are only now starting to warm up to Rust.

Zig or any other candidate will have a very hard time being considered.

Re: Zig – io_uring and Grand Central Dispatch std.Io implementations landed

#19

Post by BonusPlay »

interstice wrote: post #8
BonusPlay wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead of debating for years (like other languages), zig just tries things out. Worst case you can always rollback changes. IMO best APIs and designs are those that are battle tested by end users, not won in an argument war during committee meetings. This makes zig unique. It's fun to use and it stays fresh. You can always just stay on older version of zig. But if you choose to update to newer version, you get new t…

This is my favourite way to iterate, but the hard lesson is at some point after trying a bunch of things comes the Big Cleanup (tm). Is that a potential issue for this with Zig?

From my perspective zig doesn't have "big cleanup" upfront. It's removing older features as it goes.

stdlib changes as it wants from version to version. So do language features. Since zig is pre-1.0, zig foundation isn't scared of breaking changes.

Re: Zig – io_uring and Grand Central Dispatch std.Io implementations landed

#20

Post by gethly »

norman784 wrote: post #11
gethly wrote: post #2

[flagged]

I have my doubts on Jai, besides being built towards game development, from what I read/watched about it, it has 2 or 3 meta programming capabilities, like comptime, macros, etc it feels too much of the same, also Jai is not built towards correctness or safety, John mentality is that he knows what he is doing, so he doesn’t need those guardrails and he wants instead expressiveness. Also Jai is like C++ in complexity,…

Remember that it was Jai that inspired all these new languages. When you talk about the capabilities like comptime, that's all from Jai and why John no longer does public presentations(as people keep stealing his unfinished ideas).

Your comment about gamedev focus makes no sense as that it the most hardcore segment of all the programming there is. So if a language is good for gamedev, it's good for everything else - with high performance.

I'm still in the GC camp with Go and don't see myself leaving any time soon but Zig is just rust-fugly and takes for ever to complete(it started 10 years ago, mind you). Odin is essentially complete, just lacks official spec. I like it but can' bring myself to use it as it lacks methods and I won' be going back to writing a procedural code like its 2002.

I'm curious to see Jai being released, despite having no use case for it. My initial post is merely about purposefulness, or the lack of, for named programming languages as nowadays John's name will carry more weight than Zig could ever have. so without Zig being 1.0 after a decade, and having no competitive advantage over Jai, it has no chance to survive after Jai is released. As I said, Odin will likely will as it is quite simpler, more niche language. Zig just goes directly against Jai and it will lose.

Post reply on HN