> I didn't mention javascript backend because
> Typescript/Flowtype/Clojurescript/Scala.Js/Purescript/Bucklescript etc have
> far better tooling than Nim so I personally don't see Nim as attractive for
> doing javascript target stuff.
I wish to revise this point to mention a few positives
> Crystal has gotten a highly distinguished mention in this month's update
> summary of the prestigious TIOBE prog lang popularity index:
>
>> The top programming languages are in a long term decline: both Java and C
>> have all time low scores in the TIOBE index. And almost all of the other top
I think a set of macros implementing regular old OOP (and maybe methods too )
should probably go into the standard library. This may require the ability to
call macros in a few new ways though.
to be fair, I feel that (in general) the critical approach to OOP that people
tend to have nowadays is refreshing. c.f., Stroustrup's [OOP without
inheritance](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcpSLRpOMJM)
IMO, what most people need from OOP is dot notation I really like Nim's
uniform function
@Araq
> Which is at least one way too many...
Drop `method`.
@Honhon
I agree that the Nim JS backend is interesting, but I would not try to argue
for using it in our SW stack. Even OCaml is more of a contender in that space
since [Reason](https://reasonml.github.io/) .
I also agree that
Agree with BPR mostly.
For me OOP is not really a big deal compared to V1.0 and in that regard Crystal
has the same drawback as Nim.
I think the obvious trade off with the more aggressive type inference is the
much slower Crystal compiler. Also you can do things like this in Crystal which
I
My current plans for `method` are:
* Change the semantics slightly: Only the first argument is considered in the
dynamic lookups. Nothing else will change really.
The only problem with that is that then we have 3 ways to do dynamic binding:
1. via closures.
2. via proc type fields with
**bpr:** _Lack of inheritance (and generics!) in Go was bemoaned by many, yet
I'd say in terms of adoption it's been a success._
Go de facto _has_ inheritance via embedded types and delegation. The
differences in semantics (such as lack of open recursion) are an annoyance, but
can be worked
@Jehan
> The context here is people transitioning from other languages.
I believe I understand your point, I just don't agree with your conclusion.
Technical issues don't seem to be all that important for adoption outside of
the small initial group of early adopters, where it's very important.
* Language:Claim To FameFailure Point
* Crystal:Slick As Ruby Fast as C;..No Windows Support(Yet)
* Red:Full Stack, EASY! gui;...Documentation LACKING!
* Nim:Multi-platform, Great GC;.Nothing
**bpr:** _I doubt that that's the biggest problem._
The context here is people _transitioning from other languages_. In this
regard, OOP is probably the single biggest impedance mismatch. The point I'm
getting at is that Nim supports pretty much all other major features that you
typically find
> If I had to guess, I think the biggest problem with Nim is its really unclear
> approach to OOP.
I doubt that that's the biggest problem.
> No matter how much forum warrioring goes on about OOP, the reality is that
> traditional class-based OOP (or a reasonable facsimile thereof) is present
I agree with @Jehan on most points, which really complement rather than
contradict what I've said.
Yes, there's no such thing as a perfect benchmark, a perfect survey / opinion
poll, etc. But that doesn't take away from the fact that these things are still
useful, and that the TIOBE index is a
**Libman:** _This is very impressive, given that Crystal is a 3-year-old
newcomer that we've watched take its first steps, while Nim is still fighting
its way into the top 100..._
First, keep in mind that the Tiobe index is of somewhat questionable quality.
You'll get a lot of esoteric sites
[Crystal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_%28programming_language%29) has
gotten a highly distinguished mention in [this month's update
summary](https://archive.is/ZkkgZ#selection-691.431-691.520) of the prestigious
[TIOBE prog lang popularity index](https://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/):
15 matches
Mail list logo
