7 ms·

Fwiw andrewk seems to be deleting comments that criticize this approach. Not a good look on his part.

audunw 2mo ago
I did notice one comment that was there before but which is now gone. But it was a completely unserious and garbage comment (just a comment dissing Zig) And now I see a bunch more comments that are just utterly toxic, which I also expect will be deleted. Serious comments seem to be kept, even when they’re sceptical.
andrewflnr 2mo ago
If you see a substantive comment you think might be deleted, screenshot it. But I do see debate in there.
- chlorion 2mo ago
  directly from the thread: If you want to comment in this thread, please either have your open source zig project(s) visible on your codeberg profile, or be Fil Pizło, otherwise zig issue tracker is not interested in what you have to say Sadly I didn't get a chance to screenshot anything, but he's definitely not just deleting the toxic comments.
audunw 2mo ago
For posterity here are some comments I’m curious if will be deleted 1. > Id like a clarification on how this is safer than Rust? (Seems reasonable enough) 2. meme image with the words “bait” and “retarded” - should be deleted 3. > Funny how memory safety suddenly became a priority right after Bun moved to Rust. That feels like a pretty big departure from Zig's original philosophy. > Someone's still pretty butthurt about Jared and the Bun team. Just toxic negativity in my opinion. Author has clearly not followed Zig closely as memory safety has always been a priority as long as it doesn’t come at the expense of Zigs other more basic goals. This isn’t serious criticism and it’s completely valid to delete it. Andrew’s interest in Fil-C predates the Bun debacle AFAICT
alexrp 2mo ago
The Zig issue tracker is for technical discussion; you are more than welcome to engage and debate the idea on its merits. But we do indeed delete meta-commentary, wild speculation, and outright hostility.
- chlorion 2mo ago
  Apparently I'm not. Directly from andrewk himself: If you want to comment in this thread, please either have your open source zig project(s) visible on your codeberg profile, or be Fil Pizło, otherwise zig issue tracker is not interested in what you have to say This itself is hostility towards anyone who isn't a zig expert pretty much.
  - Zambyte 2mo ago
    This is the Zig repository. It is totally appropriate to expect people to be Zig experts when working on Zig itself. People should understand the repository they are talking about. If you're not even invested enough to write a project in Zig, of course your opinion is nothing but noise.
  - alexrp 2mo ago
    You don't need to be a Zig expert, but you do need to at least be invested in the Zig ecosystem in some way. I think it's reasonable for any open source project to only be interested in the opinions of its actual users, especially when obvious social media brigading is taking place. If I -- having written precisely 5 lines of Rust in my life -- showed up on the Rust issue tracker and started expressing my opinions on the future direction of the project and debating a proposed feature, I would absolutely expect people to be annoyed about the noise I'm generating.
    - mbStavola 2mo ago
      The difference is that Rust doesn't gate comments on proof-of-use, even if core contributors might find it annoying. Honestly, this is the first I've heard of such a policy in a project (though no doubt it exists elsewhere, in the infinite span of F/OSS projects). This isn't to say Zig's stance is unreasonable, it may even be sensible. But you cannot state that people are "welcome to engage and debate the idea on its merits" when that clearly isn't the case. Some people may be welcome to do that; even if there is a strong technical argument or important questions being posed, you are explicitly not welcome unless you meet that criteria, as evidenced by real comments being deleted from that issue.

I did notice one comment that was there before but which is now gone. But it was a completely unserious and garbage comment (just a comment dissing Zig) And now I see a bunch more comments that are just utterly toxic, which I also expect will be deleted. Serious comments seem to be kept, even when they’re sceptical.

andrewflnr 2mo ago

If you see a substantive comment you think might be deleted, screenshot it. But I do see debate in there.

chlorion 2mo ago
directly from the thread: If you want to comment in this thread, please either have your open source zig project(s) visible on your codeberg profile, or be Fil Pizło, otherwise zig issue tracker is not interested in what you have to say Sadly I didn't get a chance to screenshot anything, but he's definitely not just deleting the toxic comments.

audunw 2mo ago

For posterity here are some comments I’m curious if will be deleted 1. > Id like a clarification on how this is safer than Rust? (Seems reasonable enough) 2. meme image with the words “bait” and “retarded” - should be deleted 3. > Funny how memory safety suddenly became a priority right after Bun moved to Rust. That feels like a pretty big departure from Zig's original philosophy. > Someone's still pretty butthurt about Jared and the Bun team. Just toxic negativity in my opinion. Author has clearly not followed Zig closely as memory safety has always been a priority as long as it doesn’t come at the expense of Zigs other more basic goals. This isn’t serious criticism and it’s completely valid to delete it. Andrew’s interest in Fil-C predates the Bun debacle AFAICT

alexrp 2mo ago

The Zig issue tracker is for technical discussion; you are more than welcome to engage and debate the idea on its merits. But we do indeed delete meta-commentary, wild speculation, and outright hostility.

chlorion 2mo ago
Apparently I'm not. Directly from andrewk himself: If you want to comment in this thread, please either have your open source zig project(s) visible on your codeberg profile, or be Fil Pizło, otherwise zig issue tracker is not interested in what you have to say This itself is hostility towards anyone who isn't a zig expert pretty much.
- Zambyte 2mo ago
  This is the Zig repository. It is totally appropriate to expect people to be Zig experts when working on Zig itself. People should understand the repository they are talking about. If you're not even invested enough to write a project in Zig, of course your opinion is nothing but noise.
- alexrp 2mo ago
  You don't need to be a Zig expert, but you do need to at least be invested in the Zig ecosystem in some way. I think it's reasonable for any open source project to only be interested in the opinions of its actual users, especially when obvious social media brigading is taking place. If I -- having written precisely 5 lines of Rust in my life -- showed up on the Rust issue tracker and started expressing my opinions on the future direction of the project and debating a proposed feature, I would absolutely expect people to be annoyed about the noise I'm generating.
  - mbStavola 2mo ago
    The difference is that Rust doesn't gate comments on proof-of-use, even if core contributors might find it annoying. Honestly, this is the first I've heard of such a policy in a project (though no doubt it exists elsewhere, in the infinite span of F/OSS projects). This isn't to say Zig's stance is unreasonable, it may even be sensible. But you cannot state that people are "welcome to engage and debate the idea on its merits" when that clearly isn't the case. Some people may be welcome to do that; even if there is a strong technical argument or important questions being posed, you are explicitly not welcome unless you meet that criteria, as evidenced by real comments being deleted from that issue.