[travisgriggs]

> I think the main big thing that’s left for 1.0 is to resurrect async/await.. and that’s a huge thing because arguably very few if any language has gotten that truly right.

Interesting. I like Zig. I dabble periodically. I’m hoping that maturity and our next generation ag tech device in a few years might intersect.

Throwing another colored function debacle in a language, replete with yet another round of the familiar but defined slightly differently keywords, would be a big turn off for me. I don’t even know if Grand Central Dispatch counts, but it—and of course Elixir/Erlang—are the only two “on beyond closures/callbacks” asynch system I’ve found worked well.

[messe]

As far as I know, Zig still wants their implementation of async to avoid function colouring.

[stratts]

My understanding is that the current plans are to implement async in userspace, as part of a broader IO overhaul.

This would involve removing async/await as keywords from the language.

[throwawaymaths]

part of function coloring is "not being trivially resolvable". in this case the function coloring boundary is trivially resolvable.

    const pick_a_global_io = ...;

    fn needs_io(io:IO) void {...}

    fn doesnt_take_io() void {
       needs_io(pick_a_global_io);
    }

easy peasy. you've resolved the coloring boundary.

now, if you want to be a library writer, yeah, you have to color your functions if you don't want to be an asshole, but for the 95% use case this is not function coloring.