Nim 2.0
nim-lang.org
Nim 2.0
1–10 of 213 posts
Re: Nim 2.0
#2Been happily crunching away at Nim in production. I'm working on what is mainly a data analysis and report generation tool, compiled as a CLI executable that gets called by server scripts.
Nim makes fast, small executables. It has an excellent heterogenous JSON data structure and a good dataframe library. It prefers the stack so strongly that dynamic data structures (sequences and tables, basically its lists and dictionaries) are pointers on the stack to heap data, where the lifetime is managed by the stack frame. I don't think I have any dynamic references anywhere in my program, and don't have to worry about GC at all. The type system is simple, sensible, and guides you to correctness with ease. Nim also defaults to referential transparency; everything is passed immutably by-value unless you opt out. Generics are powerful and work exactly as you expect, no surprises. Universal function call syntax is ridiculously powerful: You can write the equivalents to methods and interfaces on types just by making procedures and functions that take a first parameter of that type; not needing those abstractions greatly simplifies and flattens code structure. It's just procedures and objects (functions and structs) all the way down.
It's been a real joy to work with and reminds me of when I discovered D back in the day, only it's even better. If you imagine native-compiled type-annotated Python where nearly 100% of your code is business logic with no cruft, you're getting close to the Nim experience.
Re: Nim 2.0
#3Congrats to all involved.
I find Nim to be an absolutely fascinating language. I've been trying to find a reason to use it on my job (my work is mobile-adjacent so the idea of compiling to JS and to ObjC is fascinating) but haven't gone beyond playing around with it so far. I've been comparing it to Rust and it's just so much simpler to get started with.
Re: Nim 2.0
#4Anyone have working experience with Nim and Zig? I'd love to hear how they are similar and contrast. I'd also would like to see some idiomatic web server benchmarks between the two (now with Nim v2).
Re: Nim 2.0
#5Fantastic language, hoping this will lead to increased adoption!
Re: Nim 2.0
#6Just started learning Nim recently and really loving it.
Even though it's older than its peers like Rust and Go, it still quite the underdog.
Hope more people start paying attention to it.
Re: Nim 2.0
#7nim is a better python(syntax wise) that compiles to c(or c++,js,etc but c is the default) with GC turned on by default. I have always been wanting to use it outside of what my job needs(c/c++/python). I hope some big players adopt Nim to make it one of the mainstream language.
Re: Nim 2.0
#8Been happily crunching away at Nim in production. I'm working on what is mainly a data analysis and report generation tool, compiled as a CLI executable that gets called by server scripts. Nim makes fast, small executables. It has an excellent heterogenous JSON data structure and a good dataframe library. It prefers the stack so strongly that dynamic data structures (sequences and tables, basically its lists and dict…
> “It prefers the stack so strongly that dynamic data structures (sequences and tables, basically its lists and dictionaries) are pointers on the stack to heap data, where the lifetime is managed by the stack frame.”
Isn’t that the same as a C++ vector or map on stack? They allocate internally as needed, and the whole container is destroyed when it goes out of scope.
Re: Nim 2.0
#9Anyone have working experience with Nim and Zig? I'd love to hear how they are similar and contrast. I'd also would like to see some idiomatic web server benchmarks between the two (now with Nim v2).
Zig doesn’t seem to have an implementation for the TechEmpower Benchmarks but Nim does: https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r21&l=y...
Re: Nim 2.0
#10Anyone have working experience with Nim and Zig? I'd love to hear how they are similar and contrast. I'd also would like to see some idiomatic web server benchmarks between the two (now with Nim v2).
I’ve written programs in both, though it’s been a while since I used Nim now.
I think I enjoyed writing Nim more. Zig is more boring, but for all the right reasons. I wouldn’t personally choose to write an OS in Nim, but I think Zig would be great for that when it’s mature. I personally started using it for embedded software.
I would probably use Nim for CLI tools, server applications, maybe GUI applications and games too.
The Zig teams seems to be putting much more effort into the whole compiler infrastructure, which is really amazing in my experience. There’s some great innovations there.