|
|
|
|
|
by o2348diuu
3066 days ago
|
|
Nim. I understand some reasons for this, as I didn't pay attention to it very much for awhile myself. I think it's only the last year or two that it's reached maturity. Its primary alternatives also have the advantage of huge existing resource bases. I'm someone who thinks there is room for lots of good languages, and each has its role, so I don't think languages should be pitted against one another necessarily. However, with Nim you have something very similar to Python in its expressivity, but with performance comparable to things like Rust and C++. The metaprogramming is very well done as far as I've seen, and it seems very well thought out. It also has solid, useful compilation targets. It just seems like the whole package for a lot of use cases and I'm not sure why it's not getting a lot more attention. |
|
I still wish the coffeescript model had worked out where we could view or think about languages differently and compile them to a common one. But unfortunately it doesn’t work without a great deal of effort.