undefined | Better HN

0 pointsdooglius1y ago0 comments

Zig is open source, so the analogy to Microsoft's EEE [0] seems misplaced.

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extingu...

0 comments

rc001y ago

Open source or not isn't the point. The point is the mission and the ecosystem. Some of the Zig proponents laud the C compatibility. Others are seeking out the "pure Zig" ecosystem. Curious onlookers want to know if the Zig ecosystem and community will be as hostile to the decades of C libraries as the Rust zealots have been.

To be fair, I don't believe there is a centralized and stated mission with Zig but it does feel like the story has moved beyond the "Incrementally improve your C/C++/Zig codebase" moniker.

Zambyte1y ago

> Curious onlookers want to know if the Zig ecosystem and community will be as hostile to the decades of C libraries as the Rust zealots have been.

Definitely not the case in Zig. From my experience, the relationship with C libraries amounts to "if it works, use it".

1 more reply

ephaeton1y ago

zig's C compat is being lowered from 'comptime' equivalent status to 'zig build'-time equivalent status. When you'll need to put 'extern "C"' annotations on any import/export to C, it'll have gone full-circle to C++ C compat, and thus be none the wiser.

andrewrk's wording towards C and its main ecosystem (POSIX) is very hostile, if that is something you'd like to go by.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse