I think Nim is pretty cool (conceptionally, haven't used it yet) and full of wonderous features: From the hands down awesome, like the a la carte GC, its AST - based macros and optimizations and effect system to positively weird stuff like its partial case-insensitivity (foo-bar == fooBar == foo_bar == foobar == fOOBAr; wat?) or its method calls (obj.foo(bar) == foo(obj, bar); I don't even). Overall it's appealing to me and certainly seems easier than rust. And, of course, I'm interested in new implementations of clojure.
I'm optimistic about is the possibility to optimize the common case of dynamic features by term-rewriting macros. However, I have some concerns about it: - How will nim's static types interact with dynamic features; can enough types for the compiler be generated by inference? - Could it be that nim is too rich a base as a host language? For the added indirection and complexity: What do we gain over transpiling to C and generating an accurate type map for BoehmGC? Concerning porting Clojure: I think ClojureScript's experiment of putting protocols/deftypes first in the bootstrapping chain has proven out, so I'd start with figuring out how protocols are best represented (nim's multimethods?). Since nim already has first-class functions, special care has to be taken how they interact with the IFn protocol. What do you think? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
