Hacker News Reader

Comment by oytis | Hacker News Reader

"Like unsafe Rust, but more convenient to use" is basically every imperative language around there, I still don't understand the specific niche that Zig intended to fill

View on HN

It's weird to talk about "basically every" language, when you have exactly three mature systems languages: C, C++, Rust. C is from the 70s, C++ is an incoherent kludge on top of it, and Rust has a miserable DX (especially when actually used as a systems language instead of relying on pulling in 500 cargo dependencies that handle the unsafe code for you). Nothing else is used for serious systems programming. You don't need to do anything innovative, simply developing C-but-with-some-lessons-learned-since-1972 to a mature enough point would be more than sufficient to add value to the pitiful array of language options available. It is the language projects that try too hard to be novel and innovative and do brand new things that don't fill a real niche; they are academic experiments that will be use at most recreationally, never for real projects. If Zig doesn't seem interesting or unique enough to you, that's a good sign for it, because a new systems language doesn't need to be interesting or revolutionary.

C, C++ and Rust are the only ones that stuck, but programming languages graveyard is full of C++ killers. Rust is around because it offered something new.

> but programming languages graveyard is full of C++ killers.

Literally just D? I'm not really aware of other serious efforts to modernise C/C++. Other than Rust, the world became completely fixated on GC languages that were inherently meant for higher-level purposes. Full-fledged attempts at memory unsafe languages in this century have been few and far between.

I look at people saying things like "Rust has a miserable DX" and I wonder whether I live on a different planet from them.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com