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

Post by pron » Sat, Feb 14, 2026, 1:38 PM UTC

flohofwoe wrote: post #98

pron wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I take a 'living' language any day over of a language that's ossified because of strict backward compatibility requirements Maybe you would, but >95% of serious projects wouldn't. The typical lifetime of a codebase intended for a lasting application is over 15 or 20 years (in industrial control or aerospace, where low-level languages are commonly used, codebases typically last for over 30 years), and while such cha…

> The typical lifetime of a codebase intended for a lasting application is over 15 or 20 years (in industrial control or aerospace). Either those applications are actively maintained, or they aren't. Part of the active maintenance is to decide whether to upgrade to a new compiler toolchain version (e.g. when in doubt, "never change a running system"), old compiler toolchains won't suddenly stop working. FWIW, trying…

Post by zozbot234 » Sat, Feb 14, 2026, 1:43 PM UTC

flohofwoe wrote: post #99

cies wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think Rust is "a better C/C++". It's a new kind of beast. Interesting, but very different. Zig OTOH is clearly, to me at least (opinion alert), a "better C". It even compiles C! I expect LLMs to be really good at converting C to Zig. > There is also the issue of will people actually code by then. LLMs don't take responsibility. So even if code is generated, a human will have to assess it. I think assessing Zi…

> I don't think Rust is "a better C/C++". It's a new kind of beast. Interesting, but very different. The same can be said about Zig's comptime. It's entirely unlike anything C, C++ or Rust has to offer. > I expect LLMs to be really good at converting C to Zig. While it's possible to translate C to Zig code - and you don't need an LLM for that, it's a Zig compiler/build-system feature - the result will be quite differ…

Post by _bohm » Sat, Feb 14, 2026, 1:48 PM UTC

gethly wrote: post #20

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,…

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 -…

Post by zozbot234 » Sat, Feb 14, 2026, 1:52 PM UTC

flohofwoe wrote: post #104

zozbot234 wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using the same language for compile-time and run-time programming is compelling, but doing it properly requires using the same approaches that dependently typed languages use. Comptime is a bit half baked.

It's not just about writing imperative code that runs at compile time, the actual interesting comptime feature in Zig is that "types are comptime values", e.g. you can inspect types and build new types with regular (comptime) code. This is very different from the template/trait systems in C++ and Rust. What Zig's comptime system is missing is the ability to build functions bodies at comptime (e.g. some sort of compti…

Post by sgt » Sat, Feb 14, 2026, 2:03 PM UTC

flohofwoe wrote: post #94

small_model wrote: post #78

I like Zig, lots of great features that work in unison. However the worry is by the time it reaches v1 Rust will have consumed the space that C/C++ used to. I think it will be a mainstream language though and gain a lot more traction after v1. There is also the issue of will people actually code by then.

I think Rust and Zig really don't overlap much when it comes to target audience. E.g. if you're attracted to Rust, you'll probably find Zig terrible (and the other way around). Rust will also never replace C or C++ in any meaningful way, at best new code gets written in new languages (and Rust being only one among many, and among languages used for new projects will also be C and C++, just maybe not that often). I th…