Nim 2.2.6

(nim-lang.org)

159 points xz18r | 1 comments | 31 Oct 25 14:15 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source

Show context

treeform ◴[31 Oct 25 15:55 UTC] No.45773510[source]▶

Thank you for working on the Nim Compiler. This is great. Another great release. The Nim Compiler continues to move forward.

Thank you very much to everyone who has contributed to the development of this superior language. Nim Compiler continues to be one of the most wonderful languages I have worked with. With the speed of C and the simplicity of Python, it has allowed me to write a lot of cool software.

I do not know where I would be if Nim did not exist in my life.

replies(2): >>45773553 #>>45773671 #

pansa2 ◴[31 Oct 25 16:07 UTC] No.45773671[source]▶

>>45773510 #

> with the simplicity of Python

So, not simple at all, then? Python is a very complex language hiding behind friendly syntax.

Do you just mean “with the syntax of Python”? Or does Nim’s similarity to Python go more than skin-deep?

replies(7): >>45773739 #>>45773919 #>>45774050 #>>45774960 #>>45775492 #>>45775901 #>>45778861 #

1. Ancapistani ◴[01 Nov 25 02:46 UTC] No.45778861[source]▶

>>45773671 #

I've used Nim a bit, though it's been a while. I've been primarily a Python developer for the past 20 years, with a sprinkling of other languages and paradigms - including languages like Scala and Haskell, so not just OOP stuff.

I characterize Nim as Python with one major difference: where Python prioritizes "developer happiness", Nim prioritized performance. As a result, the syntax looks very similar, the edges are quite a bit rougher, and performance is exponentially better.

It still "feels like" Python in a lot of ways. The ways places if differs feel a lot like Haskell IMO.

↑