nimtraits VS Kind2

Thanks for your reply.

It's interesting to know what the perceived weaknesses are. Nim does have pattern matching but it's rarely used, whereas it seems to be used a lot in Rust (probably because of the prominence of enums). Nim has static lifetime management, but it's mainly used for eliding and thread safety (for now). Traits are an interesting feature, and make a good example of why I'm so bullish on Nim: someone has already replicated them with a macro: https://github.com/haxscramper/nimtraits

The popularity critical mass thing is mainly getting eyes on the language, but I think Nim has a slight advantage in that it's incredibly cooperative with its compile targets and FFI. Like Python, it's great for good glue code and 'scripting' without the performance penalty, and I hope that helps it meld into people's toolboxes over time.

Agreed. Even from a PLT perspective, I prefer Kind2 by the Kindelia Foundation for supporting inductive theorem proving (and hopefully some level of dependent types), as well as being faster to boot.

I agree. Keep in mind our language (Kind-Lang) does target the HVM, and it is really promising. The type-checker is the fastest among proof assistants, by far; the error messages are really nice; it has a fully dependent type system which is a breath of fresh air to work with. It is still not production ready though (mostly due to lack of IO), but is the extend of our effort on that direction. We hope other lang developers get encouraged to target the HVM to. Elm and Idris are great candidates for that IMO.

Another very small proof system: https://github.com/moonad/formcorejs

The core implementation is under 700 lines of JS, including the parser: https://github.com/moonad/FormCoreJS/blob/master/FormCore.js

The author has since moved on to building a runtime with optimal evaluation (https://github.com/kindelia/hvm) and a new proof language on top of that (https://github.com/Kindelia/Kind2) with considerably better performance than existing proof systems.