Re:Zig cc: A drop-in replacement for GCC/Clang
by audunw on Tuesday March 24, 2020 @05:59PM
(#22679501)
The limitation is maturity/stability I'd say. Zig is still pre-1.0
Speed? Using Zig should be faster than using Clang directly in many cases. You get the caching system, and I think you can do more complex builds without having to resort to multiple Clang commands from a makefile.
Speed? Using Zig should be faster than using Clang directly in many cases. You get the caching system, and I think you can do more complex builds without having to resort to multiple Clang commands from a makefile.
Not sure what you mean with external libraries.