Neugram – Scripting in Go

Re:Neugram – Scripting in Go by dom96 on Friday November 03, 2017 @08:08PM (#15623089)

This is really cool, but I can't help but suggest another language which works incredibly well for scripting: Nim[1].

Of course, I must put a disclaimer: I am incredibly biased as I am of Nim's core developers. But to help convince you, Nim has:

* Shebang support

* Error handling via exceptions

* A somewhat limited REPL

* Operator overloading

While I applaud the author's efforts, I can't help but wonder if Nim would fit their needs (or be easier to adjust to their needs).

1 - https://nim-lang.org

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Neugram – Scripting in Go by crawshaw on Friday November 03, 2017 @08:16PM (#15623106)

Hi, I'm the author. I don't think Neugram is really ready for the full HN treatment, but I'm happy to answer questions.

I kept trying to write a "Why Neugram" post and kept getting stuck, which is why I went with this incomplete enumeration of differences from Go. But I get a bit more into my motivation in section 4 of this post today: https://neugram.io/blog/design-principles

Basically, I write Go all the time. I occasionally write bash, perl, or python. Occasionally enough, that those languages fall out of my head. What I really want is a scripting language that reuses all my day-to-day knowledge from Go, only with some more scripting language friendliness.

I suspect if I programmed in Nim every day, I would use it as a scripting language. Nim is neat.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Neugram – Scripting in Go by civility on Friday November 03, 2017 @08:36PM (#15623187)

Nim has become so good that no one else should develop languages as pet projects? If that's what you're saying (which is how I read it), it's a very obnoxious sentiment.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Neugram – Scripting in Go by veidr on Saturday November 04, 2017 @12:47AM (#15623844)

I took it more like "if you clicked on that, you may also be interested in this" (which I in fact was).

[ Parent | on HN ]