[spaniard89277]

As someone learning programming, should I try nim for my first compiled language, instead of C++? I know it's likely harder to find answers in the Internet, but at the same time it looks easier, coming from Python and JS.

If nim picks up pace in a few years and I already have a sense of it, it may be a good for prospects too.

[auxym]

I'd recommend it. The syntax should make you feel at home if know python, though the type system (and std lib) does make it feel like a very different language once you use actually use it.

One advantage over C++ is that you don't need to learn make, IDEs or a complex build system. The nim compiler and the nimble package manager just takes care of building for you. "nim c main.nim" and off you go, ending up with a single executable, no matter how many imports, modules, etc you have.

I do recommend this as a gentle introduction: https://nim-by-example.github.io/ and recommend you use VS Code with the Nim extension by saem.

[DarkCrusader2]

Not OP but will definitely recommend Nim if you are intimidated by C++. Nim first compiles to C and then that C code is compiled to binary. If you know python already, you will feel right at home and you get better performance and a great type system and metaprogramming. But the eco-system is definitely not as mature as Python or JS.

The documentation is good enough that I don't need to google most of the stuff while writing Nim, having types definitely help with that.

[galangalalgol]

If you already know python and JS I think you probably won't have too much trouble with Nim, but why not add something new like memory management to learn about? Rust is complicated, but it has training wheels, and its wasm support would integrate with your JS knowledge. Alternatively modern C is still used everywhere and will teach you a lot about hardware.

[juki]

> but why not add something new like memory management to learn about?

You can learn that with Nim too. It supports manual memory management like C. The new ARC/ORC GC also works more like modern C++ than a traditional GC.

> its wasm support would integrate with your JS knowledge

Nim can also compile to JS. Or you could compile it first to C and then compile that to wasm, although that's not supported out of the box.

[galangalalgol]

Those are good points. I have found that languages that don't force me to use a feature don't teach aa well as ones that do. I usually don't want to use those languages later though ( java and oop or Haskell and functional) because I like having options. Nim gives you lots of options it sounds like.

[nicoburns]

Consider either Rust or Go of you want something easier than C++, but that still has a large community and lots of learning resources.

[vlovich123]

Go yes. Rust? I wouldn’t say that Rust is easier although I may be biased with my long C/C++ background. The ownership model is a pretty complex thing to learn. I guess maybe if you Box a lot?

It does have an easier on-ramp story for getting started/adding dependencies and that may be important for getting started.

[nicoburns]

> The ownership model is a pretty complex thing to learn

It is, but if you want to write C or C++ that doesn't crash, or just silently work incorrectly then you have to internalise these rules anyway. And having a compiler that gives you a helpful error message when you get it wrong is much easier than getting a segfault at runtime that may not even occur in a proximate part of the code. Let me put it this way: in 5 years of using Rust I am yet to need a debugger, and only need even println debugging rarely.

[vlovich123]

That’s not strictly true IMO. There are things that are trivially expressible in C++ that require a lot of complexity on the Rust side to prove to the compiler the code is safe.

I don’t disagree with you on the safety aspects* and 100% real production code should really be starting in Rust. From a learning perspective though… not as sold yet. There’s a lot of things nicer (the stdlib is 100x better and more ergonomic and more pythonic in terms of “batteries included”). There’s a different set of edges though and none of the ownership concepts you learn really transfer anywhere else so you’re learning Rust’isms but not general systems programming things (just like goroutines teach you Go’isms and not what high performance thread safety means).

* The debugger claim feels specious because segfaults aren’t the only source of bugs that need debugging. How do you deal with an unexpected panic or logic bugs?

[lenkite]

As someone who properly learned C++ only some years ago, I can confidently state that Rust is harder to learn than C++. You can effectively code in C++ by learning only 20% of the language, but Rust has a far larger mental overhead to start coding. You have to do everything "The Rust Special Sauce Way".

[mamcx]

> I wouldn’t say that Rust is easier

Rust is easier than C/C++, but not at first. After you learn the semantics of it, is very smooth sailing (at least until you get into the most exotic needs like build your own async runtime).

[nicoburns]

I mean perhaps if you’re writing 20 line toy programs, but to do anything non-trivial in either language you’re going to want to use a library, and that’s already hard in C++

[rthomas6]

I would recommend just vanilla C for maximum learning value. Learning about stack vs heap, pointers, memory allocation, etc. lets you learn more about what the computer is actually doing. It will make the computer seem less like a magic box, and you will see the things other languages abstract away.