It ultimately depends upon what you mean by "as good". There is no clear single metric. Once you have >1 metric it becomes a subjective "who's priorities?" ga

It ultimately depends upon what you mean by "as good". There is no clear single metric. Once you have >1 metric it becomes a subjective "who's priorities?" game of weighting them / projecting them into a single metric. The best answer to a question like yours is: give it a try on some easy problems and see what you think yourself. No one else can really know the kinds of problems / answers / code you most work with (and sometimes the future is pretty murky even to oneself, even in these vague categories). Disclaimers issued, some things can be said which might help. Since Nim is primarily a highly ergonomic static ahead-of-time compiled language with code running as fast as C often does, errors may be caught more conveniently. Because Python is popular, especially for teaching programming, training coverage will always be better, but Nim has some core features & keywords "kinda similar" to Python which may help on the other side. Not sure about 4.0, but ChatGPT-3.5 does poorly on basic Nim things without Python equivalents. To give just one concrete example (out of many), `a,b = b,a` is a common way to manifest swapping in Python while in Nim one uses `swap a,b`. So, if you are willing to do more "compiler-assisted clean-up" or have a/develop a knack at steering the random sampling toward code which compiles, Nim could be about as effective as Python used this way. In terms of code entry work for your specific hands problem, parentheses can often be left off in Nim code and in general it seems to have much less punctuation / syntactic noise. Of course, keys can be rebound & such & maybe you do that, too. Nim definitely has more powerful abstraction mechanisms like user-defined operators, templates, and syntax macros.