The implementation details and the development ethos differ, but from the pragmatic point they compete, offering higher abstraction level over C. Moreover:

- Both took some inspiration from languages of Wirthian family.

- Both promise easy onboarding and high readability.

- Both rely on automatic memory management by default.

On the other hand, I agree that Nim feels and functions totally different while offering much more possibilities. You can definitely call Nim the anti-Go, but it doesn't negate the fact it could absolutely shine in the same domains, at least with a bit more love, attention and funding.

But they're both statically typed GC languages that compile to native binaries. Versus Zig which has no GC and is more akin to C, Rust, Ada, that sort of thing...

With ARC Nim is also very akin to Ada and Rust: https://nim-lang.org/blog/2020/10/15/introduction-to-arc-orc...

> ORC is Nim’s all-new cycle collector based on ARC. It can be considered a full-blown GC since it includes a local tracing phase (contrary to most other tracing GCs which do global tracing). ORC is what you should use when working with Nim’s async because it contains cycles that need to be dealt with.

From that blog post. Nim is great but it's more Go and less Rust...

> more Go and less Rust

Not at all, it does not have a runtime with a built-in thread pool and channels like Go.