Comments by "" (@diadetediotedio6918) on "Why I Chose Rust Over Zig" video.

  1. No, I pretty much agree with him. He did not said "I prefer the pre-processor over Zig comptime", he said "I prefer pre-processor over Zig comptime IF we can't have generics", which is another thing. Comptime in zig feels more like a workaround to the fact that typesystems are a specific part of a language than anything concrete on itself.
    33
  2. I pretty much agree with the comptime take (which extends to the notion of types as values). * It makes it harder or almost impossible for the compiler to infer types * It is resolved after compilling, so you cannot expect reasonable hintings from the tooling * It is based on the strange conception that "type systems should not use a different syntax or be in a different world", while simultaneously making this distinction implicitly and explicitly many times because this is just how things work, it feels like a workaround to a problematic worldview more than a properly designed feature.
    17
  3. No, it means you like when the language is actually sincere to what a type-system is instead of handling types as some kind of "part of the normal syntax but pero no mucho".
    3
  4.  @anonymousalexander6005  ["You lose that distinction with C or Zig"] No, you don't. In C you are dealing with text, this is already distinct of just writting the code. In Zig you write comptime code in a very specific way with very specific restrictions and a bunch of special syntax for type operations (like the ones Prime shown in the video), so in the end of the day you are just making a workaround to the fact that type-systems <should be> different from the normal language and calling it a day because it "looks similar enough" to the normal language.
    2