Hacker News Reader

Comment by shemii | Hacker News Reader

Actually it seems according to the issue that TigerBeetle (one of the bigger zig projects out there) noticed this issue [1]. It's also on their issue tracker [2].

[1] https://github.com/ziglang/zig/issues/17851

[2] https://github.com/tigerbeetle/tigerbeetle/issues/1191

View on HN

When you use a language that's in alpha- (maybe beta- now?) stage, this kind of thing should be expected. Even with the latest version of Zig, perfectly correct programs can segfault due to miscompilation, so performance issues are not even the biggest worry you should have.

One thing I really don't unserstand is how bun already reached stability with it's 1.0 release (https://bun.sh/blog/bun-v1.0) while being written in Zig, which still hasn't reached it's 1.0 release.

If you test your software built on Zig close to 100% then you can be pretty confident you didn't run into any of the Zig compiler bugs. Bun has certainly run into them but they can almost always be worked around... if you work around all problems and manage to catch everything then yeah, you can have an application that's production worthy while being built on a compiler that's not quite there yet.

The problem is, of course, you almost certainly didn't test anything near 100% and probably not even everything users may do with your software, so it's a risky bet.

Versioning isn’t an exact science, and people use whatever they see fit, both for technical but also marketing purposes.

Bun is compiled to a binary, so not sure it matters how stable the underlying language is if Bun itself has a stable API?

That’s the point OP is making, even if the program is bug-free, given the compiler’s current state there’s a chance the compiled binary has bugs (due to miscompilation).

Now that can happen with every compiler but using one in still in alpha significantly increases the risk.

Does it help at all that Zig is LLVM-based?

Not particularly. And zig is moving away from llvm anyway.

If we're talking SemVer then 1.0 only means a commitment to a public interface. It doesn't mean the code has no more bugs and ready for use in a spaceship.

Conversely, taking on a dependency prior to its 1.0 just means you're on the hook for dealing with API changes as they come up. But as long as the API you expose doesn't change, it's fine to be on 1.0 yourself.

Are there any links / examples for the miscompilations?

Zig’s issue tracker list them [0].

[0]: https://github.com/ziglang/zig/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue...

Thanks, seems like most are from LLVM or packed structs.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com