Zig is not memory safe. It's one of those "can be more safe than C" modern alternative languages. This includes those various C/C++ alternatives that use a GC or optional one (that users can disable), to provide or increase memory safety. Some of the confusion and drama surrounding Zig, appears to be the vain attempt of marketing it as "safer" than "unsafe Rust". The questionable marketing tactic has sparked numerous arguments and debates.
> difference between C++ and C is that the former is a large multi-paradigm language, while the latter is a minimalist language. These are completely different axes.
> There is no corresponding popular replacement for C that's more minimalist than Rust and memory safe.
Edit: oh, I never read the last bit "and memory safe" -- well ya, that's kind of rust's major advantage.
Also, there's FORTH!