[FraaJad]

If you like higher level languages like C#, you are not going to like Zig, except the surface similarity in syntax.

not liking syntax is not enough reason not to use a language. It takes a few days to get over the unfamiliarity in syntax. concepts are much harder to learn.

[999900000999]

If I'm not getting paid to use it, why use a language I don't like.

Syntax is a big deal.

C# looks like Java because Microsoft wanted to court Java devs.

I will admit that I prefer higher level languages since I don't care much for memory management. I just want to build cool things.

[bachmeier]

What syntax are you looking for? If you want C syntax, D will be the closest (most valid C code is also valid D code). If you want Ruby syntax, there's Crystal. Zig feels more verbose to me. For example, there are no multiline comments and no operator overloading, which kind of got to me when I tried Zig. This is, of course, purely subjective. Some people like the Zig syntax.

[999900000999]

D Lang did come up in my research. But it feels like it never took off.

[bachmeier]

True, but you mentioned Nim earlier, and this is a discussion of Zig, which hasn't even reached a stable release. D is an old, stable language that's still under heavy development. It's used by some companies and is able to support an in-person annual conference. I have no concerns about the code I write today working ten years from now.

[neonsunset]

There are more similarities in the lower level than you think. Once you start writing structs that use generics to specialize their allocator (as in, for really hands-on memory management), it starts looking similar, much like when you write portable SIMD code, which I should commend Zig for having the API for that is similar to .NET one.

[deagle50]

What do you mean not enough reason? It's not your decision.