Fast as C. Expressive as Python. Extensible as Lisp.
Name:
Anonymous2020-06-08 16:49
toy language
Name:
Anonymous2020-06-08 18:23
I didn't read any of it but I'm still sure: - No serious project written in it - Needs LLVM - Package manager full of bad packages - No debugger
Also it surely is slower than C. Also Python isn't expressive because it has no types. So Nim's actually more expressive. Also being extensible isn't a good thing. C macros are the height of extensibility everything more and every project implements its own shitty DSL.
But the website is sexy and the syntax seems pleasing. So Godspeed to you, Nimmer.
Name:
Anonymous2020-06-08 22:55
>>2 What's wrong with toys if they are good toys? You just lost your child's mind and I feel sorry for you.
The original argument was that Python was not expressive because it lacked types. As of v3.5, it does have types, so the argument fails.
Types allow one to impose additional constraints on the program. These constraints increase expressiveness, as they in effect substitute for manually-coded assertions that would be needed to provide similar guarantees.
The types are a compile-time construct, like in many other systems. So what? Does C enforce types at runtime?
I don't want to spoil the fun but I got burned so many times by ``modern'' alternatives that I just stopped using shit that isn't old news.
I'm trying to build here, not play some quasi video game. I strongly suspect all these fancy new langs and vim/emacs are just Shenzhen I/O with extra steps. Additionally they inflict fake productivity so you feel like you're not playing a video game and wasting time.
Name:
Anonymous2020-06-15 10:09
echo "What's your name? " var name: string = readLine(stdin) echo "Check my dubs, ", name, "!"
Name:
Anonymous2020-06-15 11:09
>>22 Examples: Critical infrastructure, fintech algorithms. Now that's serious business.
Oh wait. That's Nim. I thought that was VBScript, a true, professional grade programming language.