3 ms·
Just curious since I must have missed it - where is this claimed? On nim-lang.org? And yes, Nim is not 1.0 yet so some areas are still evolving. And no, I don't
by gokr 11y ago
Just curious since I must have missed it - where is this claimed? On nim-lang.org? And yes, Nim is not 1.0 yet so some areas are still evolving. And no, I don't think I asked anything?
- Ygg2 11y agoGenerally across HN? Nim's forum? There isn't a single source, I've also found a bunch of Rust/Nim comparison that eventually state something along the lines of Rust is equally safe as Nim[1] and it then gets reiterated on HN. [1]http://forum.nim-lang.org/t/1961 http://forum.nim-lang.org/t/1961
- gokr 11y agoI still don't see it. You wrote "Nim claims it's secure" and I wonder where Nim does that. What I do see is careful explanations in the language manual what is safe and what is not. I am not even remotely as sharp as pcwalton, Araq or Jehan/rbehrends when it comes to these things, but my perception of what "Nim says" is basically "if you use these things, you should be ok. If you use these other things, you are in C country." Then of course modulo bugs and wip stuff. It is perhaps a different philosophy at play. But I am genuinely interested in where this claim is made, perhaps we need to adjust some documentation or make things more clear - so do point us to it if you find it again.