> Much bikeshedding can be had over whether ADTs or OOP are preferable, but you > need at least something.
I agree; indeed I agree with your post int its entirety, with the caveat that I'd rather see a minimal 1.0 released now without any more support for runtime polymorphism than object variants. That doesn't mean that I don't want something more, just that **method** appears to me to be a design mistake, and if it is stabilized in 1.0 then we will likely be stuck with it. I was hoping that **vtref** was going to be the solution, but apparently that idea is dead now, and concepts need a bit of work. I think that there are other solutions that would fit with Nim, like the one in GNAT* with its single inheritance + multiple inheritance of interfaces, but like I said, I'd much rather see a minimal Nim sooner than a fixed Nim in 2023 or whenever. Many new languages don't (yet) have JS backends, Rust and Julia come to mind. It's not that I consider it wasted effort as much as _this is the wrong time to be doing this_. I fear that by pursuing too many things Nim will achieve very little, and I would consider that to be an unfortunate outcome. * [https://www.adacore.com/uploads/techPapers/Ada-2005_Interface_Types.pdf](https://www.adacore.com/uploads/techPapers/Ada-2005_Interface_Types.pdf)
