I’ve yet to find the perfect language but that doesn’t mean I’m satisfied with the imperfections that exist in the ones I use. It’s perfectly reasonable to not use a language for lack of operator overloading. I personally avoid languages developed with contempt for functional programming and type systems. We all have our reasons.

Python wants you back in 3.10

Not until it gets its static typing act together, and runs faster than a 1-legged dog.

Python 3.11 has its eye on you.

I've used zig for projects before. It's a nice language with some improvements on C, just not ones I care about. I did adjust, finished the projects I was doing, and I decided to move on to something else. I had a problems with the C interop as well. It's likely that I was doing something wrong, but the documentation is poor and I want something that just works.

Again, the language is great. It's a young project. I'm glad you like it. Andrew seems to have a very firm idea of where Zig is headed. It's just not for me, in part because operator overloading is not a "little thing" for me.

What projects did you finish? Do you have any links? Curious to know what people do and don't have trouble with, would be nice to see some naive code

> the lack or presence of these things are never deal breakers

Sure, but it can definitely break a tie. Frankly, operator overloading can create some really nice apis. And code that's pleasing to read takes less mental overhead to pick up.

Yes and no. I'd take a non-operator overloaded API any time of the abuse operator overloading is used for in the Haskell ecosystem.