i could not understand the guy so i slowed down that part to 0.5 speed, making Prime kinda drunk

I start to think about it in my head because I was like “No way 1.5 x 2 is 3” then i realised it was but was still confused then I thought “1.5 + 2(3.5) is more then 1.5x2(3)” now I’m more disturbed then anything.

not every pattern, but a lot of them are just a workaround for not having a feature directly supported in the language

This is how interfaces were/are done in pure C, with some Zig specifics on top of it. All the boilerplate written by hand...

i sort of assume that at some point (some size of Zig community), we're just going to have some library for creating interfaces... right? (not sure if it's possible with language like Zig)

glad that only people who watch prime are well behaved gentlemen 🗿🎩☕

Yeah, we yell CHROOT CHROOT CHROOT

Sneaky one there ;)

Zeroth it is

First!

I tend to agree. I have been writing a lot of Zig the past few months, and have encountered a few scenarios where an interface might be convenient, but overall I get by just fine without them using other features that are more idiomatic That said, It would be nice to see some Zig features that alleviated some of the pain in implementing interface-like types. I have gotten by using comptime features to enforce the contract of the "interface" (i..e. wrapper type), but it always feels kind icky.

Its not hard its just verbose

Oh it's a main channel video

I really don't see what's so hard about it. It's just a struct.

​@@i-am-linja I did not say anything is difficult. I said my brain doesnt read something well, and said the other thing is tedious

I think the .Foo thing is just about enum (or tagged union, in the .Pointer case where Prime was confused). since it's a typed language, it already knows the type of LHS so if it's enum, on RHS you can just type the second part of enum name, which i think is actually pretty cool.

Zig is great if you know C. There's very little affordance given to the developer otherwise. The compiler is not very delightful and the docs are barren, and hard to look up. But man does it run fast

@@TankorSmash It was the position a few years ago (not certain if it still is) that while decentifying the docs is obviously a precondition to 1.0, it's unwise to do it _too_ quickly as a) while things are as unstable as they are all you do is double the churn, and b) a more accessible language means a large influx of new devs, which the existing small community might not be equipped to effectively help.

Nah man, I code in C and when I look at the syntax of zig I would honestly rather keep coding in C, it is just so bad. Zig could have been great, but they messed up the syntax completely.

@@lmnts556 Syntax is the most shallowest possible thing to complain about at least, what else do you not like about Zig? Errors-as-values is a a big step up IMO

@@TankorSmash That is the exact reason why so many people ditched java, so no you are mistaken. If the way you write the code is bad it will turn away a lot of potential coders because they really can't be arsed to write it lol.

Same, I would rather just stay with C. Lots of YTers try it and just ditch it for c or other languages.

Interfaces are more comparable to virtual classes, instead of templates. But yeah, Zig is VERY verbose, like now I know how a VTable works under the hood 😅

have you seen Java

@@gronki1 Yes, and writing it and Zig feel similar.

​@@lmnts556not gonna protect zig syntax but how can it look like java 's

@@user-sn9dy5sq1q It just feels similar to write, verbose and clunky.

What specifically makes it seem "verbose" to you? It doesn't look more "verbose" than rust, C# or C++. I'm asking because I write Zig almost exclusively and haven't noticed anything verbose about it.