> What is the philosophy driving its design? I think that the [nim github tagline](https://github.com/nim-lang/Nim https://github.com/nim-lang/Nim) expresses w

> What is the philosophy driving its design? I think that the [nim github tagline](https://github.com/nim-lang/Nim https://github.com/nim-lang/Nim) expresses well the philosphy: "Nim is a compiled, garbage-collected systems programming language with a design that focuses on efficiency, expressiveness, and elegance (in that order of priority)." also Araq's blog post on 1.0 explains well how the guiding principles remained the same over time: "When I started Nim's development I had a small simple language in mind that compiles to C; its implementation should not be more than 20,000 lines of code. The core guideline has always been that Nim should be a small language with a macro system, which should be capable of extending Nim with all the features that the small core is missing. The current compiler plus the parts of the standard library it uses has roughly 140,000 lines of code, runs on a plethora of operating systems and CPU architectures, can also compile Nim code to C++ and JavaScript, and Nim's meta programming capabilities are top of the class. While the language is not nearly as small as I would like it to be, it turned out that meta programming cannot replace all the building blocks that a modern language needs to have. For example, while Nim manages to implement async via its macro system, the macro system needs to be able to compile code into a state machine. And these state machines need some form of goto and a way to capture their environment. So Nim's core needed to grow so called "closure iterators" to enable this. Furthermore, we don't really know yet how to leverage a macro system in order to give us extensibility on the type system level, so Nim's core needed generics and constraints for generics."