News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Why Zig When There Is Already CPP, D, and Rust? (2017). Parent comment

Re:Why Zig When There Is Already CPP, D, and Rust? (2017) by isaachier on Sunday October 14, 2018 @05:03PM (#18215320)
I usually agree, but at least Zig has something new to bring to the table (allocation safety).
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why Zig When There Is Already CPP, D, and Rust? (2017) by pjmlp on Sunday October 14, 2018 @06:10PM (#18215773)
Programming languages has been one of my major subjects at the university and I don't see anything new in Zig regarding memory allocation.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why Zig When There Is Already CPP, D, and Rust? (2017) by AndyKelley on Sunday October 14, 2018 @06:45PM (#18215989)
The only thing that's new is the convention to actually handle out of memory correctly, and the convention to accept an allocator as a parameter rather than using a global allocator.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why Zig When There Is Already CPP, D, and Rust? (2017) by pjmlp on Monday October 15, 2018 @02:56AM (#18217888)
Yep, nothing new unless one only knows C.
[ Parent | on HN ]