zig-overview-and-web-frameworks

Table of Contents

• What Makes Zig Special?
  • Radical Simplicity and Explicitness
  • Compile-Time Execution (comptime)
  • Seamless Cross-Compilation
  • Manual Memory Management with Allocators
  • Error Handling as Data
  • Optional Types Instead of Null
  • C Interoperability Without FFI
  • Performance on Par with C
  • Incremental Compilation (2025 Feature)
• Can Zig Replace Web Frameworks Like Express?
  • Zig Web Frameworks Available
    • Zap - High Performance with C Backend
    • http.zig (httpz) - Pure Zig Implementation
    • Jetzig - Batteries-Included Framework
    • Tokamak - Middleware-Focused
• Performance Comparison
  • Zig Frameworks Internal Benchmarks (Apple M1 Pro)
  • Express vs. Zig Context
  • Zig vs. JavaScript General Performance
• Should You Use Zig Instead of Express?
  • Use Zig Web Frameworks If:
  • Don’t Use Zig Instead of Express If:
• Practical Adoption Strategy
  • Hybrid Approach (Best of Both Worlds)
  • Migration Path
• Performance Comparison: Zig vs. Go vs. Rust
  • TL;DR Performance Summary
  • Detailed Benchmark Results (August 2025)
    • Zig vs. Go Performance
    • Zig vs. Rust Performance
    • HTTP Server Performance (Web Framework Comparison)
    • HTTP Client Performance
  • Compilation Speed
  • Memory Management Comparison
  • Real-World Performance Insights
    • When Zig Wins:
    • When Rust Wins:
    • When Go Wins:
  • Zig vs. Rust vs. C vs. Go Summary Table
• Language Comparison: When to Choose Which
  • Memory Safety
  • Complexity
  • When to Choose Which
• Real-World Use Cases for Zig (2025)
• Developer Salary & Job Market (2024-2025)
• Ecosystem Maturity (2025)
• Summary Table: Zig vs. Express.js
• Verdict
• Getting Started with Zig Web Development
  • Install Zig
  • Try http.zig
  • Learning Resources
• Status

What Makes Zig Special?

Zig is a modern systems programming language positioning itself as a better alternative to C, with some overlap with Rust’s domain. Here’s what sets it apart:

1. Radical Simplicity and Explicitness

No Hidden Control Flow:

• No implicit memory allocations
• No hidden function calls
• No exceptions (uses error unions instead)
• No implicit type casting
• No operator overloading
• No macros or preprocessor

What you see is what you get - behavior is completely predictable.

// Error handling is explicit - no try/catch
const result = doSomething() catch |err| {
    // Handle error
    return err;
};

2. Compile-Time Execution (comptime)

Zig code can execute at compile time when values are known during compilation. This is a unique feature offering flexibility normally found in interpreted languages.

fn fibonacci(n: u32) u32 {
    if (n <= 1) return n;
    return fibonacci(n - 1) + fibonacci(n - 2);
}

// Computed at compile time - zero runtime cost
const fib_10 = comptime fibonacci(10);

Use cases:

• Generic programming without templates
• Code generation
• Configuration validation
• Type introspection

3. Seamless Cross-Compilation

Build executables for any supported platform from any platform with a single toolchain.

# On Linux, build for macOS ARM64
zig build -Dtarget=aarch64-macos

# On macOS, build for Windows x64
zig build -Dtarget=x86_64-windows

No need for separate toolchains, cross-compilers, or platform-specific SDKs.

4. Manual Memory Management with Allocators

Unlike Rust’s borrow checker or C++‘s implicit allocations, Zig uses explicit allocators.

const allocator = std.heap.page_allocator;
const data = try allocator.alloc(u8, 1024);
defer allocator.free(data); // Explicit cleanup

Benefits:

• Full control over memory allocation strategy
• Easy to track memory usage
• No garbage collection pauses
• Choose allocator per use case (arena, fixed buffer, etc.)

5. Error Handling as Data

Errors are not exceptions - they’re values in error unions.

const MyError = error{ FileNotFound, PermissionDenied };

fn readFile(path: []const u8) MyError![]u8 {
    // Returns either []u8 OR MyError
}

Advantages:

• Errors are part of the type system
• Cannot be ignored (must handle or propagate)
• Zero-cost when no error occurs
• No stack unwinding overhead

6. Optional Types Instead of Null

No null pointers - use optional types (?T) instead.

const maybe_value: ?i32 = null;

if (maybe_value) |value| {
    // value is i32 here (unwrapped)
} else {
    // Handle null case
}

7. C Interoperability Without FFI

Zig can directly import C headers and call C functions with zero overhead.

const c = @cImport({
    @cInclude("stdio.h");
});

pub fn main() void {
    c.printf("Hello from C!\n");
}

Use cases:

• Gradually migrate C codebases to Zig
• Use existing C libraries without wrappers
• Replace build systems (Zig can compile C/C++ better than many build systems)

8. Performance on Par with C

• Compiles to native machine code (via LLVM)
• No runtime overhead
• Manual memory management
• Often faster than C due to better compiler optimizations
• Zero-cost abstractions

9. Incremental Compilation (2025 Feature)

Incremental compilation is getting close to being turned on by default, allowing small changes to rebuild in milliseconds instead of full recompiles.

Can Zig Replace Web Frameworks Like Express?

Short answer: Yes, but with significant trade-offs.

Zig Web Frameworks Available

1. Zap - High Performance with C Backend

• Wraps facil.io (C web framework)
• Performance: 118,040 req/s (Apple M1 benchmark)
• Production-proven (used for years)
• Middleware-like pattern similar to Express

Example:

const zap = @import("zap");

fn on_request(r: zap.SimpleRequest) void {
    r.sendJson("{\"message\": \"Hello, World!\"}") catch return;
}

pub fn main() !void {
    try zap.SimpleHttpListener.listen(.{
        .port = 3000,
        .on_request = on_request,
    });
}

2. http.zig (httpz) - Pure Zig Implementation

• Written entirely in Zig (no C dependencies)
• Performance: 123,225 req/s (Apple M1 benchmark)
• 140K req/s on M2 for basic requests
• Low-level control
• Routing, JSON parsing, request handling

Example:

const httpz = @import("httpz");

fn hello(req: *httpz.Request, res: *httpz.Response) !void {
    try res.json(.{ .message = "Hello, World!" }, .{});
}

pub fn main() !void {
    var server = try httpz.Server().init(allocator, .{});
    var router = server.router();
    router.get("/hello", hello);
    try server.listen();
}

3. Jetzig - Batteries-Included Framework

• Built on top of httpz
• File-based routing (like Next.js)
• RESTful JSON APIs by default
• Cookies, sessions, headers out of the box
• Most similar to Express in developer experience

Example:

pub fn get(request: *jetzig.Request) !jetzig.View {
    return request.render(.{ .message = "Hello, World!" });
}

4. Tokamak - Middleware-Focused

• Express-like middleware pattern
• Author: “it’s not that far from express.js”
• Request/response model
• Middleware chaining

Performance Comparison

Zig Frameworks Internal Benchmarks (Apple M1 Pro)

Express vs. Zig Context

Direct benchmarks unavailable, but context suggests:

• Express.js (Node.js): ~10,000-30,000 req/s (depending on setup)
• Fastify (Node.js): ~40,000-60,000 req/s (faster Node.js framework)
• Zig frameworks: 118,000-140,000 req/s

Estimated: Zig frameworks are 4-14x faster than Express for simple HTTP workloads.

Zig vs. JavaScript General Performance

• Zig is significantly faster than JavaScript
• Much lower memory consumption than Node.js
• No garbage collection pauses
• Faster startup times

Should You Use Zig Instead of Express?

✅ Use Zig Web Frameworks If:

1. Performance is critical

   • High-traffic APIs (100K+ req/s)
   • Low-latency requirements (<1ms response times)
   • Resource-constrained environments (embedded, edge computing)

2. You need low resource usage

   • Smaller memory footprint than Node.js
   • Lower CPU usage
   • Cheaper hosting (smaller containers)

3. You’re already using systems languages

   • Existing C/C++/Rust codebase
   • Need seamless C library integration
   • Compiled binaries preferred over interpreted runtime

4. You want single-binary deployment

   • No node_modules (Zig compiles to single executable)
   • No runtime dependencies
   • Easier containerization

5. Cross-compilation is important

   • Build for multiple platforms from one machine
   • ARM/x86, Linux/macOS/Windows from anywhere

❌ Don’t Use Zig Instead of Express If:

1. Rapid development is priority

   • Zig has longer development time
   • Smaller ecosystem (fewer libraries)
   • Less middleware/plugins available
   • Steeper learning curve

2. You need mature tooling

   • npm has millions of packages
   • Express has extensive middleware ecosystem
   • Better IDE support for JavaScript/TypeScript
   • More Stack Overflow answers

3. Team expertise is JavaScript

   • Harder to find Zig developers
   • Training costs for existing team
   • Slower onboarding

4. You need ORM/database libraries

   • Limited Zig ORM options
   • Most databases have Node.js clients (mature)
   • Zig database libraries are early-stage

5. Prototyping/MVPs

   • Express + TypeScript is faster to build with
   • More examples and tutorials
   • Easier to iterate quickly

6. Full-stack JavaScript benefits

   • Share code between frontend/backend
   • Single language for team
   • React/Vue/Angular ecosystem integration

Practical Adoption Strategy

Hybrid Approach (Best of Both Worlds)

1. Use Express for:

   • API orchestration
   • Business logic
   • Database operations
   • Most endpoints

2. Use Zig for:

   • Performance-critical endpoints
   • CPU-intensive operations
   • Real-time data processing
   • WebSocket servers

Example architecture:

┌─────────────────────────────────┐
│   Frontend (React/Vue)          │
└────────────┬────────────────────┘
             │
┌────────────▼────────────────────┐
│   Express.js (Node.js)          │
│   - Main API layer              │
│   - Auth, business logic        │
│   - Database operations         │
└─────┬──────────────────┬────────┘
      │                  │
      │ (Offload heavy)  │
      ▼                  ▼
┌─────────────┐    ┌──────────────┐
│ Zig Service │    │ Zig Service  │
│ (Image Proc)│    │ (WebSockets) │
└─────────────┘    └──────────────┘

Migration Path

Phase 1: Validate

• Build proof-of-concept in Zig
• Benchmark against Express equivalent
• Measure development time difference

Phase 2: Hybrid

• Keep Express for main API
• Migrate 1-2 performance-critical endpoints to Zig
• Run in production alongside Express

Phase 3: Expand or Revert

• If successful: gradually migrate more endpoints
• If problematic: keep hybrid or revert entirely

Performance Comparison: Zig vs. Go vs. Rust

TL;DR Performance Summary

No absolute winner - performance depends heavily on workload:

• Zig: Best for compute-heavy algorithms, lowest memory usage
• Rust: Best for multi-threaded workloads, memory-safe concurrency
• Go: Best for concurrent services, garbage-collected simplicity

Detailed Benchmark Results (August 2025)

Based on standardized benchmarks from programming-language-benchmarks.vercel.app:

Zig vs. Go Performance

Memory Usage (nbody 5M):

• Zig: 1.0 MB
• Go: 3.5 MB
• Zig uses 71% less memory

Verdict: Zig dominates compute-intensive tasks, Go wins at arbitrary-precision arithmetic.

Zig vs. Rust Performance

Memory Usage:

• Zig: Consistently lower memory footprint (explicit allocators)
• Rust: Higher memory in some cases (ownership tracking overhead)

Verdict: Rust excels in multi-threaded and compute-intensive workloads; Zig wins in simplicity and memory efficiency.

HTTP Server Performance (Web Framework Comparison)

Observations:

• Rust (Actix) is fastest overall for web servers (3-4x faster than Zig)
• Zig frameworks outperform Go standard library (1.4x faster)
• Optimized Go can match or exceed Zig in web scenarios
• All three are 4-14x faster than Node.js/Express

HTTP Client Performance

Rust’s hyper HTTP client benchmarks:

• 1.24x faster than Go’s http-client
• 2.03x faster than Zig’s http-client

Rust wins HTTP client performance due to mature ecosystem (hyper library).

Compilation Speed

Zig’s 2025 improvement: Incremental compilation now rebuilds in milliseconds for small changes.

Memory Management Comparison

Zig vs Go memory:

• Zig uses ~70% less memory than Go in typical workloads
• No GC pauses in Zig (deterministic latency)
• Go’s GC makes memory management easier but costs performance

Zig vs Rust memory:

• Both have zero-cost abstractions
• Zig gives more direct control (can optimize more aggressively)
• Rust prevents entire classes of memory bugs at compile time

Real-World Performance Insights

When Zig Wins:

1. Compute-heavy algorithms (nbody, mandelbrot, fasta)
2. Memory-constrained environments (embedded, IoT)
3. Cache-sensitive workloads (LRU, hash tables)
4. Startup time critical (CLI tools, serverless)

When Rust Wins:

1. Multi-threaded workloads (data parallelism)
2. Complex concurrent systems (safe parallelism)
3. HTTP servers at scale (Actix, Tokio async runtime)
4. When safety > raw speed (financial, medical software)

When Go Wins:

1. Network services (microservices, APIs)
2. Concurrent I/O (thousands of goroutines)
3. Rapid development (time-to-market critical)
4. Team productivity (simple language, fast compile)

Zig vs. Rust vs. C vs. Go Summary Table

Language Comparison: When to Choose Which

Memory Safety

Key difference:

• Rust: Prevents use-after-free at compile time (borrow checker)
• Zig: Prevents null pointer dereference (optional types) but allows use-after-free
• Go: Runtime safety with GC, prevents most memory errors
• C: No prevention mechanisms

Complexity

Zig’s philosophy: Simpler than Rust, safer than C, faster than Go.

When to Choose Which

• Rust: Maximum safety, concurrent systems, long-lived projects, web servers at scale
• Zig: C replacement, simplicity + performance, C interop heavy, embedded systems
• Go: Microservices, network services, team productivity, rapid development
• C: Legacy codebases, embedded systems with existing toolchains

Real-World Use Cases for Zig (2025)

1. Game Engines

   • Zig’s performance and manual memory control
   • Used in some indie game projects

2. Operating Systems

   • Low-level control needed
   • No runtime requirements

3. Embedded Systems / IoT

   • Small binary size
   • Predictable behavior
   • No garbage collection

4. WebAssembly

   • Compiles efficiently to WASM
   • Smaller binaries than C++
   • Faster than JavaScript

5. Command-Line Tools

   • Fast startup
   • Single binary distribution
   • Cross-compilation for all platforms

6. Database Systems

   • Performance-critical
   • Memory efficiency important

7. Performance-Critical Microservices

   • High-throughput APIs
   • Low-latency requirements
   • Edge computing

Developer Salary & Job Market (2024-2025)

• Average Zig developer salary: $103,000 USD/year (Stack Overflow 2024)
• Market maturity: Early stage (fewer jobs than Rust/Go/Node.js)
• Trend: Growing interest, especially in systems programming roles
• Best for: Developers already comfortable with C/C++/Rust transitioning

Ecosystem Maturity (2025)

✅ Mature Areas

• Build system (Zig can build C/C++ projects better than Make/CMake)
• Cross-compilation
• C interop
• Core standard library

⚠️ Growing Areas

• Web frameworks (usable but small community)
• HTTP clients
• JSON/XML parsing
• Testing frameworks

❌ Immature Areas

• ORMs / database libraries
• Full-stack web frameworks
• Machine learning libraries
• GUI frameworks

Summary Table: Zig vs. Express.js

Verdict

Is there a place for Zig to replace Express?

Yes, but limited:

1. Performance-critical applications: Zig shines where Express bottlenecks
2. Resource-constrained environments: Edge computing, IoT gateways
3. Microservices architecture: One or two Zig services in Node.js ecosystem
4. Learning systems programming: Zig is easier entry than Rust

Not for:

• Rapid prototyping
• Small teams with JavaScript expertise
• Projects needing extensive middleware ecosystem
• General web application development (still use Express/Fastify)

Recommendation: Use Zig as a complement, not a replacement. Run Express for most things, Zig for performance hotspots.

Getting Started with Zig Web Development

Install Zig

# Ubuntu/Debian
wget https://ziglang.org/download/0.11.0/zig-linux-x86_64-0.11.0.tar.xz
tar -xf zig-linux-x86_64-0.11.0.tar.xz
sudo mv zig-linux-x86_64-0.11.0 /usr/local/zig
export PATH=$PATH:/usr/local/zig

# Verify
zig version

Try http.zig

# Create project
mkdir my-zig-api && cd my-zig-api
zig init-exe

# Add httpz dependency to build.zig.zon
# Write server code in src/main.zig
zig build run

Learning Resources

• Official docs: https://ziglang.org/documentation/
• Zig Learn: https://ziglearn.org/
• Zig News: https://zig.news/
• Community: https://ziggit.dev/

Status

• Date Created: 2025-11-16
• Zig Version Referenced: 0.11.x - 0.13.x
• Last Updated: 2025-11-16
• Next Review: Q2 2025 (after Zig 1.0 release assessment)