[bluecalm]

Andrew's take is "it's ready when it's ready but we hope it's good enough before it's fully ready that you want to use it anyway".

It's different and I like it. You get one shot at it and may just as well get it right in as many areas as possible.

[nickmonad]

Yep. He mentioned recently in his JetBrains interview he wants Zig to be a language for the next 50 years. Rushing 1.0 for the sake of signaling to the wider industry today would be actively harmful to that goal.

[ksec]

Yes. And this kind of mentality is a near extinct in modern software development.

[mightyham]

Too bad it will not be adopted for anything serious in the next 50 years. There is no reasonable value proposition from a business standpoint for picking zig over rust. It is already the reality in much of the tech industry that Rust is filling the space previously occupied by C++. The fact that there now exists a safe low level language is legitimately a paradigm shift. It doesn't matter how many shiny cool things zig adds, being unsafe means it a technology stuck in the past.