It's too complex for that from what Ive seen. Two, key parts of Wirth's philosophy in judging language design are favoring simplicity of compiler implementation

It's too complex for that from what Ive seen. Two, key parts of Wirth's philosophy in judging language design are favoring simplicity of compiler implementation over app implementation and using heuristic of is how long compiler takes to compile itself. Although useful, I think both of these are wrong when considering performance optimization, high-productivity approaches like DSL's, benefits of stronger typing, and so on. Nim is a good counterexample to Wirth's philosophy showing program readability, dev speed, and runtime performance can all go up if we increase language/compiler complexity where it makes sense. So, the reason Nim is a great project is that it's not a Wirth language. Look at Component Pascal if you want to see one like he'd want for industrial use. It was even commercialized with Blackbox at one point.