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

Why is Zig so cool?

nilostolte.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 527 posts

Re: Why is Zig so cool?

#491

Post by creata »

sevensor wrote: post #490
creata wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> hence its "zero-cost abstractions", made to give the illusion of a high-level language without its actual high-level abstraction What does this mean? For example (you can pick another example if you want), how is C++'s std::vector less abstract than Java's ArrayList?

Because std::vector isn't much of an abstraction, in the sense of removing a set of concerns from consideration. v[i] is just pointer math. What happens if you index outside the bounds of v is anybody's guess, and it can fail silently. You could use v.at(i), but then somebody will yell at you for using exceptions. Regardless of where you stand on C++ exceptions, the fact that it's up for debate means that it will get…

I assume that whatever pron had in mind would apply equally to Rust, and this does not.

Re: Why is Zig so cool?

#492

Post by dns_snek »

smj-edison wrote: post #398
dns_snek wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed, this is probably my biggest ongoing issue with Zig. I really enjoy it overall but this is a really big sticking point. I find it really amusing that we have a language that has built its brand around "only one obvious way to do things", "reducing the amount one must remember", and passing allocators around so that callers can control the most suitable memory allocation strategy. And yet in this language we su…

Genuine question, how would error set unioning work with payloads? error.WriterFailed (might be getting the exact name wrong) is returned from many different writers, whether writing to a statically allocated array, writing to a socket, or writing to a file. Each error would have a very different payload, so how would you disambiguate between the different payloads with a global error type? The way I see it is either…

I would expect a generic interface to define a base error payload which would contain some common information and a pointer to the implementation-specific details (or embed them in the original payload as a tagged union).

Re: Why is Zig so cool?

#493

Post by kibwen »

nvlled wrote: post #462
kibwen wrote: post #458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If exceptions count as hidden control flow because suddenly a function call can jump to a `catch` block, then defer absolutely counts as hidden control flow because suddenly the end of your function jumps to a `defer` block defined at an arbitrary point higher up. If Zig wanted to be consistent with its own philosophy, it would require some sort of keyword at the end of every scope to indicate that a defer was happen…

It's not the same, defer does not conditionally interrupt the flow of execution, it will always run at the end of a block. If I see a defer, I am absolutely certain that whatever is deferred will run. The same is not true for exceptions. If I am not mistaken defer just moves the code at the end of the block, no jumping is involved.

> It's not the same, defer does not conditionally interrupt the flow of execution, it will always run at the end of a block.

But destructors also don't conditionally interrupt the flow of execution, and always run at the end of a block.

> If I see a defer

The point is that you're not seeing it. In order to know if there's a defer happening at the end of a function you can't just read the end of the function, you need to read the entire function. That's non-local reasoning, which is what Zig professes to abhor.

And in fact defer is worse than destructors here, because a destructor runs the exact same code every time, whereas defer allows arbitrary code, so you need to review every single usage. And you also need to remember not to forget to use it in the first place (which is the classic footgun with defer), so in addition to vetting everywhere you use it, you also need to vet everywhere you might have forgotten to use it.

Re: Why is Zig so cool?

#494

Post by [deleted] »

weebull wrote: post #411
smj-edison wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Genuine question, how would error set unioning work with payloads? error.WriterFailed (might be getting the exact name wrong) is returned from many different writers, whether writing to a statically allocated array, writing to a socket, or writing to a file. Each error would have a very different payload, so how would you disambiguate between the different payloads with a global error type? The way I see it is either…

I'm also wondering what payload people want. There's already an error handling trace (similar but different to a normal stack trace) that captures the how the error propagates up to the point it's being handled so shows you exactly where the initial point was.

[deleted]

Re: Why is Zig so cool?

#495

Post by dns_snek »

weebull wrote: post #411
smj-edison wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Genuine question, how would error set unioning work with payloads? error.WriterFailed (might be getting the exact name wrong) is returned from many different writers, whether writing to a statically allocated array, writing to a socket, or writing to a file. Each error would have a very different payload, so how would you disambiguate between the different payloads with a global error type? The way I see it is either…

I'm also wondering what payload people want. There's already an error handling trace (similar but different to a normal stack trace) that captures the how the error propagates up to the point it's being handled so shows you exactly where the initial point was.

A payload can contain any details that the producer of that error believes are important. I don't know what you mean by the error handling trace, how does that help with the toy JSON parsing example? I want the payload to indicate the position in the input string where the parser encountered an error.

I want a function like `diffFiles(path_a, path_b)` to have an error set of `error { ReadError }` with more detailed information in the payload (e.g. file path, translated error code). The alternative is: `error { FileAReadErrorNotFound, FileBReadErrorNotFound, FileAReadErrorPermissionDenied, FileBReadErrorPermissionDenied, ...}`

Re: Why is Zig so cool?

#496

Post by cies »

pron wrote: post #6

> I can’t think of any other language in my 45 years long career that surprised more than Zig. I can say the same (although my career spans only 30 years), or, more accurately, that it's one of the few languages that surprised me most. Coming to it from a language design perspective, what surprised me is just how far partial evaluation can be taken. While strictly weaker than AST macros in expressive power (macros ar…

> Developers writing low-level code lose the explicitness they need for review, while those writing high-level programs don't actually gain the level of abstraction required for a smooth program evolution that they need.

I've described this in the past as languages being "too general purpose" or too "multi-paradigm". Languages like Scala that try to be Haskell and Java in one.

> I have no idea or prediction on whether Zig will become popular

I think LLMs may be able to assist to move large C codebases to Zig in the next decade. Once zigc compiles C-Linux, bit-by-bit can be (LLM-assistedly) ported to Zig. This it not soon, but I think will be it's killer feature.

I don't mind if Linux becomes Rust+Zig codebase in, say, 10y from now. :)

Re: Why is Zig so cool?

#497

Post by WalterBright »

pron wrote: post #488
danielEM wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

@pron If all you mean is there is more syntax to D than to zig to achieve same/similar thing then you may be a bit aggresive on how you communicate it.

It's not about more syntax, it's about design, and how Zig was the first to use partial evaluation to do away with several, rather common, features. It's like how the novelty of the iPhone's touchscreen design was in not having a keypad, or that the novelty of the spork wasn't in inventing the functionality of either the spoon or the fork, but in having a single utensil that performs both. The more important aspect i…

> Zig was the first to use partial evaluation to do away with several, rather common, features

Please show an example of Zig partial evaluation.

Re: Why is Zig so cool?

#498

Post by xiffle »

1718627440 wrote: post #280
xiffle wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tanenbaum was right, the future of the Linux kernel is dire, and it's been a huge setback to operating systems research in practical terms. Fortunately, vendors are gradually moving away from Linux, having been hamstrung by its failures. Google is planning to move to a capability-based microkernel in the coming years for Android and ChromeOS, and Huawei has already done so with HarmonyOS. In a hundred years, Linux wi…

Irregardless of whether this is true, it has not prevented adoption of Linux.

And McDonalds is one of the most popular restaurants worldwide despite the questionable food quality.

Re: Why is Zig so cool?

#500

Post by pron »

WalterBright wrote: post #497
pron wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not about more syntax, it's about design, and how Zig was the first to use partial evaluation to do away with several, rather common, features. It's like how the novelty of the iPhone's touchscreen design was in not having a keypad, or that the novelty of the spork wasn't in inventing the functionality of either the spoon or the fork, but in having a single utensil that performs both. The more important aspect i…

> Zig was the first to use partial evaluation to do away with several, rather common, features Please show an example of Zig partial evaluation.

I posted a few examples below: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45865028
Post reply on HN