That's a weird strawman. The long names are irrelevant here. It's not about C types overall, just stdint. Each of the languages mentioned uses intN in some form.
When people do something differently than most other popular implementation it's good to ask if that's worth it.
> It existed before. Golang, Haskell, C, D (both kind of - int32_t), caml, and many others. It's i32 that deserves a "why this one?" comment.
"i32" and "u32" are used because they are short (and used often). They are just typedef away in C and are used ~forever, did you look at Linux kernel for example?
But I'm with you on the general sentiment - beyond trivial, lexical things like type names (which almost any language allows you to redefine anyway), Zig appears to have strong NIH mentality in regard to the syntax. Trying to replace C, but go out of their way trying to invent syntax just to be different from it and most other things too.
And a lot of people appear to notice and pay attention to this, as the discussion here shows.
