Frankly I don't care if the problem gets fixed or not.
I've already started a rewrite in Rust, and I don't plan on revisiting the Zig version until Zig has hit 1.0.
Coming from a Clojure background I generally agree with Hoare's "One is to make the program so simple, there are obviously no errors. The other is to make it so complicated, there are no obvious errors.", and in that sense Zig should easily be more correct than Rust which is much much much more complex.
The fact that that hasn't happened, with Rust being much more production ready for most of it's life, despite some major backwards compatibility breaking changes, leaves two possible answers for me:
1. The Rust developers are magically better programmers, which I believe to be false.
2. The rust community has a general culture for correctness and QA which the Zig community lacks.
I'd be interested in some constructive feedback on your Zig experience. There's nothing I can do with the claim that Zig users have a culture problem, especially since the "the zig community" does not work on the compiler - it's just me and a handful of other people - and I'm not really able to evaluate the claim about Rust being in a more "production ready" state at a comparable point in its life. To be honest, these two points feel like nothing more than personal insults.
So, putting those aside, if you have any actionable experiences to share, such as other problems you ran into, what went well, what went poorly, what workarounds you tried, other experiences you had that could help inform the direction of the project, then these things would help make Zig shine when you revisit 1.0.
You are comparing a language which hit 1.0 and had seven years of additional refinement, to a language which is still at least 2-3 years away from 1.0 and spent most if not all its time in the past 12 months on self hosting compiler?
Coming from a Clojure background I generally agree with Hoare's "One is to make the program so simple, there are obviously no errors. The other is to make it so complicated, there are no obvious errors.", and in that sense Zig should easily be more correct than Rust which is much much much more complex.
The fact that that hasn't happened, with Rust being much more production ready for most of it's life, despite some major backwards compatibility breaking changes, leaves two possible answers for me:
1. The Rust developers are magically better programmers, which I believe to be false.
2. The rust community has a general culture for correctness and QA which the Zig community lacks.