Your quoted sentence talks about bugs in the old C++ compiler, I'm talking about bugs in both compilers.
Pretty much all of the talks and blog posts on the `in-Zig` compiler are about better performance, lower memory footprint, e.t.c.
I would much rather have heard a talk about how they improved correctness through automatic testing, formal methods, simple language design e.t.c.
A language that (does or doesn't) compile your code in 0.1 seconds to a broken binary is worse than piping your code into dev/null.
Re:Zig Is Self-Hosted Now, What's Next?
by generalizations on Tuesday October 25, 2022 @01:34PM
(#33333677)
I see the acknowledgements of the bugs in the old compiler, but what bugs in the new compiler are you talking about? Also, a recurring theme in zig has been the advantages of their simple language design.
Re:Zig Is Self-Hosted Now, What's Next?
by kristoff_it on Tuesday October 25, 2022 @01:48PM
(#33333881)
See my reply in another comment tree https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33333827
> The self-hosted compiler brings many advantages, but it did cost us a significant amount of effort and time. While Zig is still going up in popularity and starting to make a tiny dent in the industry, people that have been following along for long enough will know that this work has reduced our momentum in the last two years.
> Bug fixes in the compiler have been often put on hold since fixing the bootstrap compiler was ultimately useless, and accepted feature proposals have been piling up because it would have required implementing everything twice.