Zig doesn't prevent memory errors, or data races at compile time, but Zig does handle undefined behavior better than C/C++, and has options instead of nulls. So you get some sized step in the right direction on correctness, without adding the complexity of a borrow checker. Zig compiles faster, Rust is more mature of an ecosystem. Zig is a simpler language, Rust is featureful/more complex.

To me Zig seems to be an in-between between C and Rust. It feels a lot more modern and pleasant to use than C without the rather large complexity of Rust. Of course, nothing comes free, so it's also less safe than Rust.

I personally really enjoy Rust's commitment to safety and I do find that the difficulty of writing Rust code that will pass the borrow checker and its stricter type system is well worth it but I know that some people find it frustrating and not very pragmatic. If you fall in this camp then Zig might well be worth a try.

Basically coming from C if you think that Rust goes too far, try Zig. If you think that Zig doesn't go far enough, try Rust.

Zig's C integration story is pretty compelling - https://ziglang.org/#Integration-with-C-libraries-without-FF...

You can call C code from Rust as well but it's not as tightly integrated into the language (and probably can't be, since C code is inherently unsafe).