[flagged]
Zig Creator Calls Spade a Spade, Anthropic Blows Smoke
21–30 of 862 posts
Re: Zig Creator Calls Spade a Spade, Anthropic Blows Smoke
#22Did we read the same Anthropic and Andrew Kelly's posts? Anthropic is not in the programming language market; their post about rewriting Bun in Rust is full of technical details that led to improving the end product for their users. Zig's response is a sour opinion piece full of personal attacks. For context, I'm using Codex and have no interest in either Zig or Rust, so just observing this drama from the sidelines.
Yeah I don't understand these myopic takes.
Jarred's post about Bun-Zig-Rust post was technical and polite.
Andrew's post in response was anything but that.
Re: Zig Creator Calls Spade a Spade, Anthropic Blows Smoke
#23Languages do matter.
And I think the only sensible backend languages when starting a new for-profit project is Python, Go, and Rust for 99% use-cases.
In other cases, third-party packages, tooling, integrations, and telemetry starts to suffer.
Re: Zig Creator Calls Spade a Spade, Anthropic Blows Smoke
#24> Anthropic is actively campaigning to end software engineering
I didn’t read further, this is just sensationalism at its crudest
Re: Zig Creator Calls Spade a Spade, Anthropic Blows Smoke
#25"Anthropic is actively campaigning to end software engineering" - good but are they the only ones? I do not like Anthropic after their recent locking mechanisms. I use opencode with GLM, Mimo, Qwen, and what not. I use Codex as well.
Anthropic does not need to tell me that much of software engineering is being re-written. In my opinion, the costs have crashed. I build commercial projects at 1/3rd my earlier costs. I started build everything I can in Rust and I am still doing that. My projects have only gotten more ambitious, latest being https://github.com/brainless/akar - a WIP, please don't scream at me.
Many folks have publicly said they want to keep AI agents away from their works. Good for them. I want to accelerate software engineering, something I have done passionately for 20 years, with all the agents I can use. And I make my own agents, constantly experimenting to push local llm based agents.
If engineers want to stay behind, good for them. Not everyone does. Andrew Kelly's post read like an attack, IMHO. But why care about me? I am just a farmer (https://www.instagram.com/curryhostel) who uses AI to now build ambitious software.
Re: Zig Creator Calls Spade a Spade, Anthropic Blows Smoke
#26Yeah, but argumenting that "Bun codebase is a mess" is anti-Zig in itself. The whole point of the borrow checker is to make it impossible to write wrong code. If Zig accepts bad code, but assumes people will have self-discipline to maintain it, how is that different from C? C assumes good discipline, as well as C++. But it will happily accept bad code. So I'm not even sure what Zig is even improving on. Rust was desi…
> The whole point of the borrow checker is to make it impossible to write wrong code.
> In 2026 we need guarantees that we can't produce invalid code.
Rust doesn't provide either of those guarantees.
If I were to rephrase your sentiment for accuracy: Rust disallows certain coding patterns. Certain classes of bugs can only appear in those coding patterns.
IOW, Rust disallows $FOO which is a superset of "specific class of errors". This means that while Rust prevents specific bugs, as a side-effect it will also prevent some correct code.
Re: Zig Creator Calls Spade a Spade, Anthropic Blows Smoke
#27I think I got all the information I need to be able to judge that article from seeing that the author calls themselves a "Retrofuturist Software Mender".
Re: Zig Creator Calls Spade a Spade, Anthropic Blows Smoke
#28I think like most people, I don’t have a problem with Andrew “calling a spade a spade,” even if I find his reasoning motivated. The bigger problem with the post is that it talks out of both ends of the mouth: it’s clearly meant as a personal attack, but also insists that it isn’t.
When I read the post, my first thought was that I wouldn’t want to build things in Zig, because any technical decision I make, good or bad, might subject me to this kind of article from their BDFL. I can’t conceive of the leadership of the Python or Rust or any other community I’ve ever worked with doing something like that.
Re: Zig Creator Calls Spade a Spade, Anthropic Blows Smoke
#29Did we read the same Anthropic and Andrew Kelly's posts? Anthropic is not in the programming language market; their post about rewriting Bun in Rust is full of technical details that led to improving the end product for their users. Zig's response is a sour opinion piece full of personal attacks. For context, I'm using Codex and have no interest in either Zig or Rust, so just observing this drama from the sidelines.
Stating you use Codex does not add any meaningful information to the case.
Meant to imply he's not a Claude fanboi.
Re: Zig Creator Calls Spade a Spade, Anthropic Blows Smoke
#30Yeah, but argumenting that "Bun codebase is a mess" is anti-Zig in itself. The whole point of the borrow checker is to make it impossible to write wrong code. If Zig accepts bad code, but assumes people will have self-discipline to maintain it, how is that different from C? C assumes good discipline, as well as C++. But it will happily accept bad code. So I'm not even sure what Zig is even improving on. Rust was desi…
[deleted]