+1 Nim is too messy for me. And the codegen bugs are very annoying, just like black magic.<p>Also I don&#x27;t like the Python-style with no end-marker. I&#x27;ll be glad if Araq does plan to provide another syntax for Nim. But I fear the style war in the community.<p>Things I like about Nim:
1. Unified function syntax call, which makes my code more OO-like.
2. Many customizable operators and easy to grasp operator precedence.
3. The pegs library is small but very nice. I began Nim programming with it, wrote handy grammar validators with it, and finally got parser trees in pure Nim for the ASTs. Really fun.
Not much, because I hope Nim could be simpler and get the most practical features done right. I am dizzy with its syntax and STL now.