I’m curious how software can be created and evolve over time. I’m afraid that at some point, we’ll realize there are issues with the software we’re using that can only be remedied by massive changes or a complete rewrite.

Are there any instances of this happening? Where something is designed with a flaw that doesn’t get realized until much later, necessitating scrapping the whole thing and starting from scratch?

  • nayminlwin
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 miesięcy temu

    There’s already a lot of people rewriting stuff in Rust and Zig.

    • KryptonBlur@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      8 miesięcy temu

      What are the advantages of Zig? I’ve seen lots of people talking about it, but I’m not sure I understand what it supposedly does better.

      • lemming934@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        8 miesięcy temu

        The goal of the zig language is to allow people to write optimal software in a simple and explicit language.

        It’s advantage over c is that they improved some features to make things easier to read and write. For example, arrays have a length and don’t decay to pointers, defer, no preprocessor macros, no makefile, first class testing support, first class error handling, type inference, large standard library. I have found zig far easier to learn than c, (dispite the fact that zig is still evolving and there are less learning resources than c)

        It’s advantage over rust is that it’s simpler. Ive never played around with rust, but people have said that the language is more complex than zig. Here’s an article the zig people wrote about this: https://ziglang.org/learn/why_zig_rust_d_cpp/

      • tetris11
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 miesięcy temu

        Tiny learning curve, easy to refactor existing projects