`zcc` would be even better.
$ alias zcc='zig cc'
Zig cc: A drop-in replacement for GCC/Clang (2020)
11–20 of 126 posts
Re: Zig cc: A drop-in replacement for GCC/Clang (2020)
#12I really like what they've done for cross-compilation. Automatically selecting appropriate libc/crt implementation is such a relief. Compared to Zig, cross-compilation in C/C++/Rust seems downright user-hostile: you have to obtain the correct cross-sdk, but it won't tell you which one, or how to get it (some combos don't even exist), or even where to put it. If you don't guess everything correctly, it will fail with…
I would not include Rust in that list, in my experience rustup and cargo are miles ahead of C/C++ when cross compiling.
Re: Zig cc: A drop-in replacement for GCC/Clang (2020)
#13> Take a moment to appreciate what just happened here - I downloaded a Windows build of Zig, ran it in Wine, using it to cross compile for Linux, and then ran the binary natively. Computers are fun!
Re: Zig cc: A drop-in replacement for GCC/Clang (2020)
#14I’ve been learning Zig for a few months now and what I’m in love with is the ability to just use Zig to interact with whatever C libraries I want, but doing so with the conveniences that Zig offers.
I want to use SDL2 and cairo and pango? No problem! GTK4, easy peasy! There’s a C lib that comes as a single .c file that makes it easier to interact with SDL? Drop it on the project folder and compile it with Zig along all the other .zig files!
As somebody that has been avoiding C as much as I can, I’m loving this approach since it has open the doors to the world of C for me without having to learn autotools, make, valgrind, et al
Re: Zig cc: A drop-in replacement for GCC/Clang (2020)
#15I really like what they've done for cross-compilation. Automatically selecting appropriate libc/crt implementation is such a relief. Compared to Zig, cross-compilation in C/C++/Rust seems downright user-hostile: you have to obtain the correct cross-sdk, but it won't tell you which one, or how to get it (some combos don't even exist), or even where to put it. If you don't guess everything correctly, it will fail with…
It's always a bit harsh comparing a 36 year old language with more-or-less full backwards compatibility, with a new language designed with the benefit of hindsight.
That's not to say that it's impossible to do something like that in a C++ compiler but it's going to be more work than there is benefit. Tangentially related: https://twitter.com/__phantomderp/status/1416108650809241601
C++ also tries to bring in modern programming research when it makes sense, but that also explains why it's like an octopus with extra legs nailed on.
Re: Zig cc: A drop-in replacement for GCC/Clang (2020)
#16`zig cc` is also amazing to compile C and C++ code to WebAssembly. For standalone WebAssembly or WASI.
No need to install yet another toolchain, this is just another target Zig can compile to, out of the box.
Re: Zig cc: A drop-in replacement for GCC/Clang (2020)
#17I really like what they've done for cross-compilation. Automatically selecting appropriate libc/crt implementation is such a relief. Compared to Zig, cross-compilation in C/C++/Rust seems downright user-hostile: you have to obtain the correct cross-sdk, but it won't tell you which one, or how to get it (some combos don't even exist), or even where to put it. If you don't guess everything correctly, it will fail with…
I would not include Rust in that list, in my experience rustup and cargo are miles ahead of C/C++ when cross compiling.
Personally, I see it in three tiers: Rust improved upon those experiences, but I still wish someone would implement what Zig has in rustc.
Re: Zig cc: A drop-in replacement for GCC/Clang (2020)
#18I really like what they've done for cross-compilation. Automatically selecting appropriate libc/crt implementation is such a relief. Compared to Zig, cross-compilation in C/C++/Rust seems downright user-hostile: you have to obtain the correct cross-sdk, but it won't tell you which one, or how to get it (some combos don't even exist), or even where to put it. If you don't guess everything correctly, it will fail with…
I would not include Rust in that list, in my experience rustup and cargo are miles ahead of C/C++ when cross compiling.
[deleted]
Re: Zig cc: A drop-in replacement for GCC/Clang (2020)
#19I really like what they've done for cross-compilation. Automatically selecting appropriate libc/crt implementation is such a relief. Compared to Zig, cross-compilation in C/C++/Rust seems downright user-hostile: you have to obtain the correct cross-sdk, but it won't tell you which one, or how to get it (some combos don't even exist), or even where to put it. If you don't guess everything correctly, it will fail with…
I don't know much about cross compilation, but in terms of the Rust case, could part of it be the relative complexity of the language compared to Zig?
Re: Zig cc: A drop-in replacement for GCC/Clang (2020)
#20I’ve been learning Zig for a few months now and what I’m in love with is the ability to just use Zig to interact with whatever C libraries I want, but doing so with the conveniences that Zig offers. I want to use SDL2 and cairo and pango? No problem! GTK4, easy peasy! There’s a C lib that comes as a single .c file that makes it easier to interact with SDL? Drop it on the project folder and compile it with Zig along a…
This is one of the things I really liked about working with Swift. You just got 50 years of C libraries for free, with high level features on top of it, which means there is a lot you can do.