[lifthrasiir]

Oh, yeah that might be confusing. I meant "you can say the same thing for GC language if that's true, which isn't necessarily true, so that must be false".

More precisely speaking: GC languages are said to delay memory problems far beyond the horizon, which is often unreachable throughout the project's history. Zig can be a similar case.

[saghm]

Ah, I understand now. That said, I still think there's a pretty strong argument that this is a lot worse for Zig than a GC language, because they also give you safety for that overhead (and potentially ergonomics). When a language is trying to operate in the same niche as C with what seems to be an overt attempt to be less cumbersome than Rust even if it makes it less safe, it's a bit concerning to see that even without the safety it seems to have more overhead rather than less. Put another way: it sounds like it might as well just add a GC if it's not going to be competitive on performance.