> Nim needs a "killer app". This doesn't necessarily mean a specific app, like > Rails was for Ruby - it can be a general pattern, some clear specific thing > that Nim does better than its competitors.
I'm afraid neither will do. I'm afraid that "being the most libertarian programming language: no restrictive licenses / patents" also has quite little influence; for most "it's free (beer & freedom) is good enough. I'm afraid the only way to take off in a fast way would be a big organization or company using Nim in a _well visible way_. Regarding Python I 'd be careful with comparisons because when Python came up (I remember it well) it did scratch a _real and major_ itch; that's something Nim hardly can do because nowadays there are way, way more languages than itches. _The major_ factor is observed is boring: it's basically social. It's "everybody learned it at university" (e.g. java), "(almost) everybody is using it", "it came for free", "my peer group uses it", etc. Another major factor is (imo) that relatively few seriously study diverse languages and (can and) do value Nim for what it offers. It's weird, I know, but from what I see, Nim will continue to grow only slowly _because_ of it being about good principles and design rather than about this or that "sells well" argument, plus Nims lack of a big organization with lots of money and marketing behind it - which in my book is _positive_ because it means that Araq and team (and to a degree, we, Nims users) make decisions. Btw, Nim isn't that poorly placed. Just think about Ada which had and still has some very large users but still is all but significant (even "nobodies" like Go overtook it). So what? Neither do I need a tool to brag nor one to use together with many, many others. What I need is a _good_ tool - and Nim _is_ a good tool. And in some respects it's an advantage to be less well known.
