[shirol]

> Just search "segfault" on the Zig issue tracker and you'll see why people are starting to be skeptical of the future utility of such a language in the face of something like Rust.

Zig has 110 open "segfault" issues [1] versus Rust's 175 open "segfault" issues [2]. So, by your logic, Rust is also bad.

edit: I was just trying to point out that the parent's "just search segfault" argument is lazy. Also, Zig is still in beta.

[1] https://codeberg.org/ziglang/zig/issues?state=open&type=all&...

[2] https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20stat...

[post-it]

You're not seriously out here posting raw numbers without considering the base rate are you

[baranul]

I think the open to close ratio needs to be provided in any such comparison. It would arguably give a better indication of which project is doing a better job at addressing incoming user issues and bug fixes.

[jadbox]

You're not seriously posting about base rates without any form of agreeable evidence around such base rates?

[brookst]

Yeah, well, my not-yet-written language has zero segfault issues raised, so it’s clearly superior to both Zig and Rust. I really need to get around to writing it because obviously it’s a much better design.

[VWWHFSfQ]

It's a bad metric, but also Zig didn't migrate all of their issues from GitHub. Run the same count on GitHub and you'll see the full picture

[baranul]

To make a better comparison, you have to add up Zig's issues on GitHub that weren't brought over and abandoned.

That would be Zig's 700 or so Codeberg issues + the 2,700 or so GitHub issues.

[Ygg2]

Without base rate you're comparing #X in a city vs #Y in a continent and drawing conclusions from that.

It's not even wrong.

[shirol]

You’re literally agreeing that the parent’s argument is bad. I was just applying his logic, and I didn't draw any conclusions.

[Ygg2]

No. I just think you're taking judge by number of segfaults out of context. That said, I wrote this before the edit.