4 ms·
Not sure why Nim keeps getting compared to Python. It's quite evidently influenced by the Wirthian languages, though I suppose contemporary programmers aren't r
by vezzy-fnord 11y ago
Not sure why Nim keeps getting compared to Python. It's quite evidently influenced by the Wirthian languages, though I suppose contemporary programmers aren't really versed into those.
- TylerE 11y agoGC, indentation-significant syntax?
- vezzy-fnord 11y agoWhitespace significance is practically the only resemblance, then. Wirth's languages obviously were garbage collected.
- beagle3 11y agoAlgol and Oberon were garbage collected, but Pascal and Modula-2 weren't. Not sure about others (Euler? Modula-3? Oberon-2?) Nim feels a lot more like Python than one would think just reading the descriptions. I can't put my finger on why, exactly - maybe the type inference that gives an almost duck-type experience, maybe the incredibly helpful dogfooding community; I'm not sure.
- lobster_johnson 11y agoI believe Nim's creator has a background using Borland's Pascal compilers (Delphi, Turbo Pascal). Nim is basically a modernized ObjectPascal with GC, generics and whitespace sensitivity. He even started out prefixing type names with T and P, just like Borland did, though fortunately that's going away.
- pathsjs 11y agoI only compare it to python because of the use case. Actually, if you read the post, I also consider Lua and other languages. Still, I think, the similarity in syntax can help. If there is one thing that python got right, in my opinion, is its straightforward syntax, and that helps saving brain power for something other than parsing