Not OP, but see the entire section on metaprogramming: https://mojolang.org/nightly/docs/manual/metaprogramming/. Mojo's compile-time programming is influenced by Zig, but has features that are not in Zig e.g traits, generics (real generics), and constraints, that work together.

It might be feature richer, but it is hard to say it is more powerful. Sometimes, features (especially constraints) will reduce powerlessness.

That's fair, I think I should have just said "comparable to Zig". The type'd ness is what I was thinking of, but having actually written some zig in the last few days to play with their Io model / see what passing around an allocator is like, Zig is pretty fantastic.

I still prefer the structure in Mojo, but boy do I miss if/switch as expressions.

Well, it certainly allows you to encode invariants in a more precise manner.