This is my breaking the glass moment in ziggit, first post ever. Absolute noob to zig and noob to programming. This morning I asked “xAI/grok” which was:
Why all the extras syntax for simple “hello world !” in zig ?
const std = @import("std");
pub fn main() void {
std.debug.print("Hello, {s}!\n", .{"World"});
}
I do understand that maybe the question itself could be better asked to get better result but I was curious to see what the community thinks about the answer I got back from the robot? Would you give a different answer because my initial thoughts were more specific about this line :
std.debug.print("Hello, {s}!\n", .{"World"});
So it’s answer was :
Zig’s “Hello, World!” syntax feels verbose compared to, say, Python’s print(“Hello, World!”) because Zig prioritizes explicitness, safety, and low-level control. Let’s break down why each part is there:
const std = @import("std");
-
Zig doesn’t have a global namespace or implicit imports. You explicitly import the standard library (std) to use its functions, like print. This avoids name clashes and makes dependencies clear.
-
@import is Zig’s built-in mechanism for including modules, and std is the standard library module.
pub fn main() void { ... }
-
Zig requires an explicit entry point (main) for executables, like C or Rust. The pub keyword makes it accessible to the linker, and void specifies no return value.
-
This structure ensures clarity about program startup and avoids ambiguity.
std.debug.print("Hello, {s}!\n", .{"World"});
-
Zig’s std.debug.print is used for console output in this context. It’s part of the std.debug module, which is explicit about its debugging purpose (other output methods exist for different use cases).
-
The {s} format specifier and .{“World”} tuple are part of Zig’s type-safe formatting system. {s} indicates a string, and the tuple .{“World”} passes the argument explicitly. This design prevents format-string vulnerabilities (like C’s printf) and ensures type checking at compile time.
-
The \n is explicit for newline, as Zig doesn’t assume platform-specific line endings.
Why not simpler?
-
Explicitness: Zig avoids magic or implicit behavior to make code predictable, especially for systems programming where surprises can cause bugs.
-
Safety: The formatting system and explicit imports reduce errors, like mismatched format specifiers or accidental namespace pollution.
-
Control: Zig targets low-level programming, so it exposes details (like module paths) that higher-level languages abstract away.
-
No runtime assumptions: Unlike Python or JavaScript, Zig doesn’t rely on a heavy runtime or standard I/O defaults, keeping binaries lean.
Could it be shorter?
Zig could have a simpler print function or implicit std import, but that would sacrifice its design goals. For comparison, C’s printf("Hello, World!\n"); requires #include <stdio.h>, and Rust’s println!("Hello, World!"); needs std. Zig’s approach is verbose but aligns with its philosophy of clarity and control.
If you want a one-liner, you could theoretically write a custom wrapper (e.g., fn print(str: []const u8) void { std.debug.print("{s}\n", .{str}); }), but you’d still need the import and main structure for a complete program.
Well this post is basically me saying hi to the community and I am looking forward to your thoughts on this. I am currently reading Pedro Duarte Faria on introduction to zig and doing the ziglings exercices. I will also polish my skills to better write in the ziggit discourse with the chatbot helper.
Cheers everyone
