It's a surprisingly fantastic language. In my opinion, it's the perfect language. But here are some issues in my eyes:
* The community is tiny. A rounding error compared to Go, Rust, etc.
* The core team of contributors is even smaller. You could comfortably have an intimate dinner party with all of them. If they lose interest, the language would likely die.
* The library distribution story wasn't great last I checked.
Caveat: I haven't used Nim for more than a year now. Maybe all these issues are no longer relevant. I really want it to succeed, but who knows what the future holds.
Fair points, although I'd like to keep in mind: Never underestimate a single stubborn person or small team dedicated to an idea.
I'm a C++ developer and, for now, sticking to it on larger projects since I love the thinking behind the C++ evolution over the decades. Rust still feels like a hype/moving target. The big selling point appears to be memory safety, but that's just a detail and not enough to justify a switch. I'm keeping an eye on how Rust and Nim will evolve in the next 5–10 years, but for now, C++, Erlang, and Lisp are my go-to choices for projects which should last the upcoming decades.
I have spent my career as a C++ developer. What is more interesting to me about Rust isn't memory safety, but safe concurrency. But I have so much legacy code to deal with that all I can do is be influenced by Rust ideas: force all code to document assumptions about ownership and lifetimes, as if we had a borrow checker, and focus attention on redesign of code where this doesn't work cleanly.
