←back to thread

Nim 2.2.6

(nim-lang.org)
159 points xz18r | 6 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
Show context
synergy20 ◴[] No.45772525[source]
nim is memory safe, python syntax, emits c/c++/js. It really deserves more love and publicity.

more mature than zig, much easier than rust.

replies(5): >>45772662 #>>45773011 #>>45773084 #>>45773138 #>>45777708 #
tinfoilhatter ◴[] No.45773084[source]
It's too bad that the BDFL of Nim (Araq / Andreas) treats the language like his personal compiler development playground. This has led to a hard fork of the compiler, many experienced and frustrated developers leaving the community and language behind, and an extremely fragmented ecosystem.

He is also very difficult to work with and isn't very welcoming to newcomers. The community "leaders" / moderation team is also full of abrasive individuals with fragile egos.

replies(11): >>45773309 #>>45773547 #>>45773578 #>>45774278 #>>45774745 #>>45775652 #>>45775816 #>>45777119 #>>45777255 #>>45778879 #>>45778930 #
1. cenamus ◴[] No.45773309[source]
With hard fork do you mean the 2.x.x version?
replies(1): >>45773395 #
2. tinfoilhatter ◴[] No.45773395[source]
Apologies for not providing a link!

https://github.com/nim-works/nimskull is the hard fork I was referring to.

replies(2): >>45774692 #>>45778278 #
3. vintagedave ◴[] No.45774692[source]
> The project was started as a fork of Nim … The overall language will be evolved into something entirely different and incompatible.

A hard fork with a goal of being incompatible _sounds_ more strong behaviour on the part of those who forked, than on the original language owner.

I’m sure there’s a lot of context I’m missing. But what is the story behind this?

replies(1): >>45776738 #
4. tinfoilhatter ◴[] No.45776738{3}[source]
> I’m sure there’s a lot of context I’m missing. But what is the story behind this?

There was a falling out between the Nim core development team and several volunteer compiler developers. The former seemed to be paying more attention to their personal projects, while still desiring to maintain their positions of control and authority over Nim and its direction. The latter group grew increasingly frustrated, the situation became extremely toxic, and ultimately Nim lost several talented compiler developers to the hard fork.

I believe the goal of being incompatible with Nim resulted from the developers involved in the hard fork feeling like the Nim development team had done a poor job of designing certain portions of the language and compiler. I'm pretty sure they ditched the C++ backend, and made some substantial changes to the langauge to bring it more inline with their ideals.

I'm not involved in the development of either project, so a much better source of information would be the Nimskull project's developers themselves and the core Nim development team.

5. Intralexical ◴[] No.45778278[source]
Last non-bot commit was over 2 weeks ago, and it seems to be mostly 1 account working on it. I don't think it looks active enough to be the big schism it's made out to be?
replies(1): >>45778786 #
6. tinfoilhatter ◴[] No.45778786{3}[source]
Nim itself has very few core developers. Comparing the number of developers involved in a hard fork to the number of Nim developers is silly, in my opinion at least.

The project has 21.5k commits authored, most of them oriented at replacing the existing compiler backend with a CPS-oriented one. Nim 3.0 is replacing the backend with one that is focused on CPS. There is no doubt that the developers responsible for the hard fork of Nim inspired Nim 3.0.

Yes, it very much is the big schism it's made out to be. I don't know what kind of activity level you expect, when the Nim language itself has few core developers working on it.