Zig: Build System Reworked

3 hours ago (ziglang.org)

I just upgraded some code to Zig 0.16.0 and I am actually really happy with the results. It impacted A LOT of things, but the changes were actually very good and seems to have set the language for a bright future, especially with the new IO mechanism which allows supper efficient code that looks good whether it's implemented single-threaded, multi-threaded or just via an event loop!

If you haven't tried Zig since 0.16.0 was released, I highly recommend having a look. The release notes for this release were huge!!

https://ziglang.org/download/0.16.0/release-notes.html

After having used Zig for a couple of months now I am convinced it is a fantastic tool language. You just pick it up to hack some idea together freely. Every time I hit a wall, I find the creators have thought of it already and offers comfort. But nothing gets in your face how to use the programming language "correctly".

For me it is now the go-to "tinker in my garage" language.

  • Is it really that good?

    My go-to "tinker in my garage" language is Python - lightweight syntax that stays out of your face, batteries included, packages for everything that's not included. What's Zig's edge?

    • Have you ever thought "Ugh, this bit of Python code is running much slower than I expected on my computer. Wonder if anyone has written a native library for this"? That's probably the closest use case for someone who matches your description -- a language that is much more ergonomic, much more 'modern' feeling (in all the good ways), while still extremely compatible with C.

      As for the language itself, it's going to be more verbose than your Python code. Cons: you'll have to spell out a lot of things that you thought were obvious assumptions. Pros: you will be able to look at a page of code and know with a great degree of certainty that there are no hidden gotchas. No monkey patching, no __init__. Basically, it just does what it says on the tin.

      And finally, about the std lib and batteries: there's HTTP(S), compression algorithms, hash algorithms, RNG, I/O, the basic data structures you'd expect, JSON. Third-party libraries, if you choose not to vendor, are handled by including the repository url in a file (also automated by a CLI command), and then adding it to the build script (not automated). The `zig` command handles fetching and ensuring sanity, but otherwise assume a bit of elbow grease will need to be involved.

      2 replies →

    • Zig is low level, so it will certainly not replace your python usage, it is more like a modern C than anything else. There’s a video of a recent interview with Andrew Kelley, if you want to watch it to understand better what Zig is for, it’s on Jetbrains YouTube channel.

      6 replies →

    • I like that you have more freedom. You can play around with some idea but once you want to do something "serious" you can break into it directly. I start simple but sometimes blip into some performance obsession and I find Zig allows that.

This sounds like great news, Zig's compilation times are already terrific and this is going to only make them better.

  • > Zig's compilation times are already terrific

    In my experience, this (for now) is mostly aspirational. It's obviously a major goal, and there are clear milestones outlined on how to achieve it, but in practice the initial compile of an empty project or the excruciating pause when you `direnv allow` and ZLS needs to be (re)built are not what I'd describe as "terrific".

    • >(re)built are not what I'd describe as "terrific".

      It sounds like you are a strong candidate to try out the new improvements mentioned in this devlog and see what benefits you can get for yourself.

[flagged]

  • Carpentry would have been ideal career. Building real things, artisanal or not, and nobody insisting yet that the chest of drawers you're building include AI

    • Of course, the flip side is, modern construction isn't done with artisanal woodworking techniques.

      I'm not even thinking of AI, but Rust. I guess I'm just uninterested in a "modern C".