[ofalkaed]

So no one should even try because they will never win over all of the C/C++ crowd so are doomed to fail and forever to be a wannabe? I think Andrew has gone about things in a good way, going back to C and exploiting hindsight, not trying to offer everything as quickly as possible. Extend C but keep C interoperability and do both better than C++ instead of trying to be the next big thing and he goes about it in a very deliberate and calculated way. He may not succeed, but the effort has given us a great deal.

[pjmlp]

One should try, while being aware of the realities of language adoption.

I disagree Zig is that great deal of a language, it would have been if we were talking about 1990's programming language ecosystem, not in 21st century.

Use-after-free problems should not be something we still need to worry about, when tooling like PurifyPlus trace back to 1992.

[ofalkaed]

I don't think Andrew believes Zig is going kill C or C++, he probably has hope but I think he is aware of the reality. He found a way to make a living on something he was passionate about.

Use-after-free is a fact of life until something kills C, but the realities of language adoption are against that. Zig seems interesting and worthwhile in offering a different perspective on the problem and does it in a way more agreeable than Rust or the like for all those who love C and are adverse to large complex languages. The realities of language adoption are as much for as against Zig, large numbers of people are still getting drawn to C and Zig seems to do a better job addressing why so many are drawn to it than the alternatives.