nimble VS Nim

I was using Nim for some of last years Advent of Code problems. I was mostly liking the syntax. Was a bit bother by the standard library have a snake case and camel case reference for each function (if I'm remember that correctly).

At the time nimble also required me to have NPM to install the the Nim package manager, Nimble. This was not ideal, but looking at [the nimble project install docs](https://github.com/nim-lang/nimble#installation) it seems like it is now package with the language.

Might try dusting it off for some AoC puzzles this year :)

nimble develop -g doesn't work A possible solution is to add "g" to where "global" is placed.

I meant it's unfortunate that Nimble has no standard system-wide library management. It's one of the mains thing holding Nim back from being more prevalent in the Linux sphere in my opinion.

`nimble` is the package manager for the programming language `nim` [1].

From [2], we can see that `nimble scss` simply generates the CSS files for the frontend.

The benefit of OSS is you can answer these questions yourself with a bit of poking around! IMO this is a fairly standard installation process, maybe the fact that it's using Nim instead of a more mainstream language makes it look more daunting than it is. The only out-of-the-ordinary thing here, IMO, is `nimble build` instead of `make build`.

[1]: https://github.com/nim-lang/nimble

[2]: https://github.com/zedeus/nitter/blob/master/nitter.nimble

Something I'm excited about: v1.6.2 integrates support for (not yet released) Nimble[1] v0.14, which introduces lockfiles. I've had terrible experiences with lockfiles in JS land, but they are sorely needed for Nim projects as (fingers crossed) they'll allow for reproducible builds without having to resort to the nimbus-build-system[2]. The latter isn't completely horrible — a lot of much appreciated hard work has gone into it, and it's been a real workhorse — but some days it feels like a big ball and chain.

[1] https://github.com/nim-lang/nimble#nimble

[2] https://github.com/status-im/nimbus-build-system

So you wouldn't have a problem with a package manager where the configuration is in the same language, such as Nimble?

if you structure your project with nimble (which can be be used for both libraries and applications) you can use nimble build and nimble run. While I do use nimble for managing dependencies for projects I don't use these commands that often while developing, e.g. because I'm working on a single test or something like that.

Having similar syntax to Ruby makes it easier to port Ruby code to Crystal (ex: digest-crc -> digest-crc.cr). The Crystal stdlib is very complete and they have a growing "shards" ecosystem, roughly the same age as Rust's https://crates.io or Nim's nimble. You should look into Crystal again.

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.