Re:The two types of C programmers (a provocative thesis)
by gavinhoward on Wednesday April 26, 2023 @08:42AM
(#35712757)
Comptime is too crazy.
I have an acquaintance who was trying to write a Zig compiler. Comptime was his bane.
If you think I care about "needlessly debating people more than actually understanding the tools in front of me," let me dispel that notion.
I was once a fan of Zig.
Yep. I was. I thought it was great and was even going to rewrite all of my monorepo in it.
And then I started studying it in detail, trying to understand it. It took a while, but I came to realize that Zig appears good and has flashy ideas, but that Andrew just didn't understand the consequences of his design decisions.
In other words, I spent time trying to understand Zig before I ever got these opinions.
To go back to the topic, sure the use of this may appear boring, but if tools have a hard time working with Zig code, so will people. That's my problem with it.
You are absolutely right that this is a "boring" part of Zig, but that doesn't mean it's good. It means that that's where complexity hides.
Once I figured that out, I realized that to make better software, it would be better for me to stick with C.
My wording, by the way, comes from a bit of exasperation because to me, it feels like you, Andrew, and the rest of the Zig team are reluctant to accept criticism or that Zig isn't perfect or even the best.
I have an acquaintance who was trying to write a Zig compiler. Comptime was his bane.
If you think I care about "needlessly debating people more than actually understanding the tools in front of me," let me dispel that notion.
I was once a fan of Zig.
Yep. I was. I thought it was great and was even going to rewrite all of my monorepo in it.
And then I started studying it in detail, trying to understand it. It took a while, but I came to realize that Zig appears good and has flashy ideas, but that Andrew just didn't understand the consequences of his design decisions.
In other words, I spent time trying to understand Zig before I ever got these opinions.
To go back to the topic, sure the use of this may appear boring, but if tools have a hard time working with Zig code, so will people. That's my problem with it.
You are absolutely right that this is a "boring" part of Zig, but that doesn't mean it's good. It means that that's where complexity hides.
Once I figured that out, I realized that to make better software, it would be better for me to stick with C.
My wording, by the way, comes from a bit of exasperation because to me, it feels like you, Andrew, and the rest of the Zig team are reluctant to accept criticism or that Zig isn't perfect or even the best.