winter_squirrel

As a counterpart, if you have to layoff that many people, is it really the right time to also put the stress of a leadership shift into the company?

I can see the argument for this triggering an eventual change, but having _both_ the chock of a CEO change _and_ 28% of the company being layed off at the same time seems unwise.

I will say, this is why I love the JVM so much. Runs on everything, I can pull, compile and build this game easily without worrying about any kind of platform specific library issue unlike open source c++ games I've tried to compile

As someone who uses both for different personal projects:

- I use zig as my build system for both rust, zig, C libraries and linking since the build system works really well for this purpose

- When I need to write applications or libraries that can benefit from compile-time code, I always try and use zigs since it's much easier to use comptime then a combination of rust macros and generics

- I like the zig async story a lot better. Or at least it's much easier to wrap my head around and write code in compared to rust + tokyo

On the other hand, sometimes I know a project will benefit from the borrow checker or I want to use some of the awesome rust crates that the community made and I'll use rust instead.

It saddens me that a proper string type is a hill the zig folks are willing to die on. The language would have _felt_ a lot better if they would have (at least) just copied what rust did with strings.

I understand the argument that in most situations a byte array might be what you actually want, but in practice it feels very dirty to be passing byte arrays around instead of expressing the underlying meaning of that byte array as a type (in this instance a String type).

Having a string type also makes any standard library functions on strings infinitely easier to discover.

> I'm almost certain was driven by Microsoft

Would you happen to have any actual evidence to back this up with?