| > Why not point the finger at Windows? Development on Windows is archaic. How so? Zig is a programming language, so I'm guessing the main interactions it needs with the OS are file IO. It shouldn't need to do any GUI work as long as it provides proper bindings to the C functions. And file IO is essentially cross platform in C++ as long as you use the stdlib. Threads are also essentially multiplatform if you're using the stdlib. I also don't know if Zig is written in C, C++, or Zig so it may differ. Generating binaries is different, but I wouldn't consider windows binaries any more archaic than Mac or Linux binaries, and I'm not sure if zig already uses LLVM backend or something anyways. But given all that, writing basic Win32 code to do file IO or any sort of OS level interactions isn't any less archaic than what I've had to do in Linux. It's an API, and it's got a lot of cruft built up over the years, but so does any sort of Linux OS API. Here's the Linux API for creating a file[0] and here's windows[1]. There's more parameters for the Win32 version, but the documentation is solid and gives a lot of tangential information. I actually prefer the Win32 docs to a lot of the Linux docs that I've used because they describe all the details very explicitly. So I wouldn't call Windows any more archaic then any other OS. Basically what I'm saying is, it takes like 2-3 hours at most to add Windows support to a programming language unless you've architected your code in a way that tangles OS operations with regular operations. It's really not that hard to keep OS code separate from the apps logic to make porting the app to different operating systems trivial. [0]: https://linux.die.net/man/3/creat [1]: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/fileapi/n... |
C'mon.