It happens in many projects .. devs will just ‘do something convenient so they dont have to do the work to do it properly’ and then that just becomes the convention, because nobody else wants to do hard work to do things properly, either.
It happens in many projects .. devs will just ‘do something convenient so they dont have to do the work to do it properly’ and then that just becomes the convention, because nobody else wants to do hard work to do things properly, either.
You've basically arbitrarily focused on a particular flawed design decision of a language while ignoring a thousand others that they may well have gotten right.
It's not possible to just sit down and get everything 100% right up front. The language design space has too much both depth and breadth to it.
IMHO, you may be confusing “care” for legibility. The creator(s) made a choice that you disagree with and that you may not understand. They also haven’t justified or explained their choice to you. That illegibility might feel careless, even a little mean, but I reckon their focus was on figuring out the language, not seeking widespread approval.
Which is why it’s so frustrating when bikeshedders use indecipherable shades of paint.
Good code is best made understood at scale .. or at least, that’s how it used to be.
Anyway I think the Zig folks are pretty clever and know what they’re doing .. I”m sure there are holes to poke in all of it, but I wonder what the big Zig projects will do with this change…