• @[email protected]
        14•1 year ago

        I’m pretty skeptical it could be as fast and safe as Rust without the added challenge. Like, even doing what Rust did was a big deal.

        • @mundane_party
          6•1 year ago

          I could be wrong, but based on the Wikipedia article it seems like it’s more trying to be a python replacement than a rust/c++/Java/etc replacement. The big thing with rust is that it’s rules allow memory safety without a garbage collector, while unless I missed something it seems like nim just uses a garbage collector. Not that that’s necessarily some huge problem or anything, but you know, different purposes

          • @[email protected]
            1•1 year ago

            So basically, what I’m hearing is that it’s not fast like Rust. Yup, that tracks, this is just a guy stanning his favourite.

        • @[email protected]Afaraf
          1•1 year ago

          Can compile to C which then compiles using your favourite compiler. So it can operate at the speed of C

          And the new memory management system is similar to rusts system (and can be fully disabled if you want manual memory management)

          • @[email protected]
            2•1 year ago

            Can compile to C which then compiles using your favourite compiler. So it can operate at the speed of C

            Technically, it all compiles to assembly, but Python is still a lot slower than C or Rust. Speed is lost along the way through those layers of abstraction.

            And the new memory management system is similar to rusts system (and can be fully disabled if you want manual memory management)

            So it doesn’t have a garbage collector? I’m going to have to actually look into this myself.

        • qazEnglish
          0•1 year ago

          I think it transpiles to C so theoretically it could be quite fast, but I doubt the generated C is as fast as manually written C or Rust.