opendylan VS Nim

Dylan, which was originally created by Apple: https://opendylan.org/

OpenDylan kept being developed for a long time even after Apple lost interest, and they still do releases every once in a blue moon, but the community is tiny, and nobody is doing anything with Dylan (save for the compiler itself).

what is this fairly close resemblance? Parentheses?

There are a bunch of Lisp like languages without s-expression syntax: Lisp 2, Logo, MDL, RLISP, CLISP (not the CL implementation), Dylan, Racket with its new syntax (Racket2, Rhombus), Skill, ...

For example Dylan is based on Scheme & CLOS + a different syntax + some other influences. https://opendylan.org

https://github.com/dylan-lang/opendylan/blob/master/sources/...

If they go with another language, it had damn well better be Dylan. Apple already designed it and screwed up when they abandoned it back then (circa Java).

Carp, Lux and Dale are 3 I'm familiar with.There's also Dylan, though that one dropped its parentheses. But if we go by the brackets, technically, we can argue that any expression-based languages is a Lisp. I once wrote a Lisp to JS transpile whose output had more parens than the input. :)

Julia is a Lisp in the same form as Dylan.

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.