Zig is still very much work-in-progress, much more so than Rust. I'd say it's too early to speak of traction there.
Re:Rust: A Critical Retrospective
by UmbertoNoEco on Thursday May 19, 2022 @10:01PM
(#31442524)
OK, it has been 6 years, so fair enough, let's wait and see at least for the 1.0
Re:Rust: A Critical Retrospective
by loup-vaillant on Friday May 20, 2022 @01:49PM
(#31450544)
That's the difference between Zig and Go.
As far as I can tell, Go was kinda rushed, and they called it 1.0 before they get to add the generics it obviously needed. And I bet adding those generics in a way that preserves backward compatibility was a bear.
Zig will be done when it's done.
I suppose every thing in Rust has a raison d'etre but you pay with complexity that versatility. I think there is space now for a modern, memory-safe, SIMPLE, systems programming language. C has the backwards compatibility problem (although I am still bullish on its future) and a language like Zig never got any traction. Hopefully the future will bring new, interesting stuff.