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

Zig 0.16.0 Release Notes

ziglang.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 44 posts

Re: Zig 0.16.0 Release Notes

#31

Post by pjmlp »

AndyKelley wrote: post #30
pjmlp wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is too much compiler magic for Zig folks.

You know, I used to be annoyed by all your consistently shitty remarks in any zig related HN thread, but these days, it's refreshing to have an unpleasant interaction with a human. Sincerely, thanks for all your hand-written hatred.

It goes both ways, when I see remarks regarding other languages from Zig community folks, not from you directly.

Modula-2 like safety is still better than C will ever be, though.

Yeah, it will be human as far as I can take it, cheers.

Re: Zig 0.16.0 Release Notes

#32

Post by lenkite »

redrobein wrote: post #19
badtuple wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interfaces can still be expressed using vtables. You just have to write the vtable yourself rather than have the language do it for you. Also, Zig's tagged unions (enums with payloads in Rust) are really ergonomic and often what you want instead of interfaces. Alot of languages that use interfaces simply don't expose a good way of doing it so everyone reaches for interfaces by default. But if you don't need an actual…

Are there any plans to add syntax sugar for interacting with vtables?

Wish we could bribe Andrew Kelley to add a built-in for this. There are only a couple of regular ways that everyone creates these vtables. Might as well just standardize it.

Re: Zig 0.16.0 Release Notes

#33

Post by spiffyk »

slopinthebag wrote: post #27
pjmlp wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has C style interfaces, meaning structs with function pointers. Which is basically how most device drivers in OSes that happen to be written in C, including UNIX flavours, work.

That's a hack, not an interface lol

How is it a hack? I mean, you may not like the fact that Zig does not provide syntax sugar for interfaces, but how exactly do you think they are implemented in languages that do?

Re: Zig 0.16.0 Release Notes

#34

Post by sali0 »

lenkite wrote: post #32
redrobein wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there any plans to add syntax sugar for interacting with vtables?

Wish we could bribe Andrew Kelley to add a built-in for this. There are only a couple of regular ways that everyone creates these vtables. Might as well just standardize it.

I feel like a std lib module would be sufficient.

Re: Zig 0.16.0 Release Notes

#35

Post by baranul »

ksec wrote: post #18

I/O, Linked, Incremental Compilation. Apart from 0.17 being a short release cycle. I wonder how many more releases before 1.0? Are we looking at 0.20, another one and half year of baking?

It's strange, because it has been over 10 years now. To get to 0.20, seems like it would be another 2 to 3 years. The weirdest thing is how Zig continuously gets a pass for being "almost there", for around 5 years now.

An argument could be made that why it's taking so long is about the language's BDFL wanting the freedom to continually make breaking changes. As it is, they got another bewildering pass for sweeping 3,000 plus issues under the rug, with the move from GitHub to Codeberg.

Re: Zig 0.16.0 Release Notes

#36

Post by baranul »

pjmlp wrote: post #28
metaltyphoon wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We all know that OP wasn't asking about THAT kind of interface and more "please create vtables for me" style of interface

That is too much compiler magic for Zig folks.

Perhaps it can be a relief to make assessments about a couple of newer C alternative languages[1][2]. Zen C appears to be moving up very quickly, and even has autofree.

[1]: https://github.com/c3lang/c3c (C3)

[2]: https://github.com/zenc-lang/zenc (Zen C)

Re: Zig 0.16.0 Release Notes

#38

Post by mk12 »

baranul wrote: post #35
ksec wrote: post #18

I/O, Linked, Incremental Compilation. Apart from 0.17 being a short release cycle. I wonder how many more releases before 1.0? Are we looking at 0.20, another one and half year of baking?

It's strange, because it has been over 10 years now. To get to 0.20, seems like it would be another 2 to 3 years. The weirdest thing is how Zig continuously gets a pass for being "almost there", for around 5 years now. An argument could be made that why it's taking so long is about the language's BDFL wanting the freedom to continually make breaking changes. As it is, they got another bewildering pass for sweeping 3,…

Programming languages take a long time to build. Zig is a more ambitious project than most. I see lots of progress in these release notes and I'm happy to "give a pass" for the fact that it's not finished.

No one's been giving passes bewildering or otherwise for sweeping issues under the rug, because that didn't happen. The 0.16 release notes are linking to plenty of GitHub issues. If you have additional information to post on an issue then you can copy it to Codeberg: https://codeberg.org/ziglang/zig/issues/30027

Re: Zig 0.16.0 Release Notes

#39

Post by lukaslalinsky »

slopinthebag wrote: post #27
pjmlp wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has C style interfaces, meaning structs with function pointers. Which is basically how most device drivers in OSes that happen to be written in C, including UNIX flavours, work.

That's a hack, not an interface lol

You would be terrified if you realized how the whole C-based GNOME/GTK ecosystem works :)

Re: Zig 0.16.0 Release Notes

#40

Post by lmaoatyou »

AndyKelley wrote: post #30
pjmlp wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is too much compiler magic for Zig folks.

You know, I used to be annoyed by all your consistently shitty remarks in any zig related HN thread, but these days, it's refreshing to have an unpleasant interaction with a human. Sincerely, thanks for all your hand-written hatred.

[dead]
Post reply on HN