Neat project, but the README would benefit from a human author. I can tell what you prompted by the way the README is worded. It should tell me more about what this project solves. I don't care that it uses idiomatic zig. Why should I use this instead of lazygit?
In general, for most projects like this the README is the product. You usually have better results using it and the code as a starter prompt for your own software if you feel the need. I wouldn’t use this kind of thing directly from upstream.
If this is idiomatic zig, functions must be expensive because it fails horribly in the DRY departement. Also, papering over exceptions everywhere by... catching and not handling exceptions. What could possibly go wrong?
This is huge. I've always wanted to use Git in the terminal but never been happy with the underlying language that other TUIs were written in. Now that I know that I'm using developer-managed memory I can be much more comfortable and confident changing between branches, pushing, and pulling, and even merging code. Thanks Simone!
I've been using tig, written in C, for ages now, never once crashed. And I'm all for safe languages, but a git TUI isn't really as critical as you imply - if I interpreted the sarcasm correctly.
Very cool, but if I'm prompting / looping an AI agent as my main development process, what is the use case here? I feel the biggest help would be to make Reviewing PRs from the terminal easier, I care less about commit logs and status.
you can see the diff before you merge it. my main use case for lg is looking at diff and staging logical parts then committing with another tool or manually.
I’m such a CLANKER hater now, I want to know if this was written by agents or not. If written by agents, I don’t want anything to do with it. I only want human written software, even LLM autocomplete seems a bridge too far.
Hi HN, I've been building Ziggity, a keyboard-driven terminal UI for Git.
It's inspired by lazygit (which I used daily), but written from scratch in Zig rather than being a port.
Why another one? Two reasons, honestly. There were a few areas of lazygit I wanted to improve on for my own workflow, and I wanted a real project to build in Zig, which is genuinely powerful and fast, and a joy once it clicks. It compiles to a single small static binary with explicit memory ownership and no libgit2, it just shells out to the `git` you already have. The UI is built on libvaxis. And I let myself add a bit of sugar along the way, because a tool you stare at all day might as well be pleasant.
A few things that are a bit different from lazygit:
- A divergence view + status-coloured commit hashes so ahead/behind commits stand out at a glance
- Independent drill-downs in the Branches/Commits panels (deliberate, not a port artifact)
- Line level staging, interactive rebase, custom patch building, bisect, arbitrary-ref diffing
It's honest about its stage: v0.3.0, macOS/Linux/Windows builds, MIT. The Windows build compiles and libvaxis supports it, but I haven't smoke-tested it on real hardware yet. There's an about screen with a spinning ASCII donut, because why not.
Install: `brew install simoarpe/ziggity/ziggity`, or grab a static binary
from the releases page.
I'd genuinely appreciate feedback, especially on the UX and on the Zig code if you're into that. It's a spare time project, so bug reports and "this feels wrong" notes are welcome.
It's probably because of HN's anti-LLM filter. I don't know if submitters use LLMs to touch up their descriptions or if these descriptions often use LLM-like phrasing.
Also lots of "genuinely" and some air quoted phrases which are another tell.
I guess you folks are right and it's probably the llm filter. I looked at the GitHub and thought it had too many screenshots to not have had some human effort, but who knows these days.
If that's what happened, I wonder if the same filters exist for tools like Grammarly. Some people are English as a second language, and some people simply want to put the best foot forward and make the best first impression.
reply