> But things like taste and quality matter. And I trust the creator of Zig more than the creator of Bun when it comes to said taste.

Having read both articles I'm in the opposite corner. I found Andrew's personal ad-hominem filled emotional post distasteful and Jarred's purely technical and filled with praise of Zig well written and in good taste.

▲

krupan 3 days ago | parent [-]

But it wasn't full of praise for Zig. It specifically pointed out that his project written in zig was full of memory safety bugs, and said that there was no way to get around that if the project stayed with zig. It's ludicrous!

▲

fnands 2 days ago | parent [-]

He never said impossible, just hard.

But how is this news? Memory safety bugs are one of (if not the) main source of bugs in C/C++ and also Zig, and Rust's main claim to fame is that it makes it easy to catch these issues at compile time. I feel his criticisms of Zig are fairly uncontroversial.

	▲	krupan 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		Memory safety is a source of bugs in languages without garbage collection and/or whatever rust does, however memory safety is not THE source of bugs. If it were then we'd expect code written in JavaScript or Python (memory safe languages) to have zero bugs, and that's definitely NOT the case. When you get the hang of C and C++ memory bugs are not very common compared the normal bugs that all software has. They still can happen but people have gotten the idea that every C program is riddled with them without seeming to realize that code written in C is the foundation for almost everything and has been for a long time. Compilers, operating systems, device drivers, network stacks, core utilities, even games are all written in C or C++ and we are not drowning in killer memory related bugs.