cargo-raze VS Nim

The same reason Bazel builds avoid using Cargo when building Rust software, so I'll describe why Bazel would do this:

- Bazel wants to cache remote resources, like each respective crate's source files.

- Bazel then wants to build each crate in a sandbox, and cache the build artifacts

This is an established practice, and Nix wants to drive the build for the same reasons.

See:

- https://github.com/bazelbuild/rules_rust

- https://github.com/google/cargo-raze

I can make much more sense of C++ code to ensure that two build systems produce the same effect than I can parse and learn two completely unconnected programming languages deeply enough to do the same. I can unit-test core routines. I can as easily extract core logic into shared (configuration) files etc. The benefit of a standard is not to discourage alternatives but rather to agree on definitive semantics and shared and common needs (that is: in this case needs for interfaces to the compiler/linker). The implementation and general availabilty is just one of the by-product. The ability to do introspection in common terms is maybe the most consequential other product, and this is critical for 'transpiling' to other build systems and writing automated adapters such as the one that bazel is recommend for cargo's dependency management.

Cargo is not that tightly coupled with Rust. You can absolutely use bare rustc, and in fact people do that with other build systems like Bazel.

Interesting, aren't the community-driven crates for these areas satisfactory enough? There's PROST and tonic, and quite well-used. I don't know about Bazel though, but I found this. Feel free to correct me on this subject, I admit I don't know that much about it.

There is a project to generate Bazel BUILD files from Cargo.toml.

22. Nim - $80,000

I think the right answer to your question would be NimLang[0]. In reality, if you're seeking to use this in any enterprise context, you'd most likely want to select the subset of C++ that makes sense for you or just use C#.

[0]https://nim-lang.org/

I don't think it's a rust-inspired language, but since it has strong typing and compiles to javascript, did you give a look at nim [0] ?

For what it takes, I find the language very expressive without the verbosity in rust that reminds me java. And it is also very flexible.

[0] : https://nim-lang.org/

I see a valid cert for https://nim-lang.org/

FYI, on the front page, https://nim-lang.org, in large type you have this:

> Nim is a statically typed compiled systems programming language. It combines successful concepts from mature languages like Python, Ada and Modula.

You better off with using a compiled language.

If you interested in a language that's compiled, fast, but as easy and pleasant as Python - I'd recommend you take a look at [Nim](https://nim-lang.org).

And to prove what Nim's capable of - here's a cool repo with 100+ cli apps someone wrote in Nim: [c-blake/bu](https://github.com/c-blake/bu)

Chapel has at least several full-time developers at Cray/HPE and (I think) the US national labs, and has had some for almost two decades. That's much more than $100k.

Chapel is also just one of many other projects broadly interested in developing new programming languages for "high performance" programming. Out of that large field, Chapel is not especially related to the specific ideas or design goals of Mojo. Much more related are things like Codon (https://exaloop.io), and the metaprogramming models in Terra (https://terralang.org), Nim (https://nim-lang.org), and Zig (https://ziglang.org).

But Chapel is great! It has a lot of good ideas, especially for distributed-memory programming, which is its historical focus. It is more related to Legion (https://legion.stanford.edu, https://regent-lang.org), parallel & distributed Fortran, ZPL, etc.