3 ms·
In what ways will you say Go is simpler than Nim? I did try out Go but found it a bit difficult. Maybe would need to spend some more time.
by nafey 6y ago
In what ways will you say Go is simpler than Nim? I did try out Go but found it a bit difficult. Maybe would need to spend some more time.
- tyingq 6y agoNim does have a fair amount of Perl like "more than one way to do it" things. Like countup(), ".." and "..<".
- auxym 6y agoNim has more features like generics and metaprogramming via templates and macros. You don't have to use them, but if you read someone else's code that uses it, you might have trouble understanding it, which probably doesn't happen with Go.
- cma 6y agoGo is adding generics, so you may have to read other people's code using them.
- mesaframe 6y agoThat's a poor excuse. You cannot do everything in just few things and would want things that help you do more, or create abstractions easily. That will require additional syntax. In Go absence of generics will make you write more code that will increase code length unnecessarily.
- auxym 6y agoFWIW, my answer was not meant to be trashing nim. I like and use nim. And to be perfectly transparent, I know relatively little of Go. My impression is that nim has more features in general, which could be considered to make it more complex. That can be a good and/or bad thing depending on perspective.