As I understand, D is a pragmatic vision of how C++ could look like if it was not C++ (that is, not designed by committee, without decades of backward compat ne

As I understand, D is a pragmatic vision of how C++ could look like if it was not C++ (that is, not designed by committee, without decades of backward compat needed, without the need to support some exotic hardware, etc.) It aims to completely drop the "C with classes" heritage, bring OOP and FP together while integrating important concepts into the language (delegates instead of function pointers, strings instead of char arrays, slices instead of T[], etc.) While Nim indeed comes from Wirthian heritage instead of K&R heritage, its goals are pretty similar to D. You could say that Nim is for (Object)Pascal what D is for C(++). I think that's what the GP alluded to - not that Nim borrows directly from D or the other way around.