* Use ARC/ORC. I think the thread-based GC was always buggy, but it's not
needed. Nim fills a niche as a Python replacement for easy interfacing to C
(and possibly C++), and the reference-counted GC is much better in that
application.
* The global threadpool was an architectural mistake.
* Until there is an instance threadpool in std
(<https://github.com/nim-lang/Nim/issues/11922)>,
* simply prefer <https://github.com/yglukhov/threadpools>
* Compilation time has gotten much slower. (And let's not use "incremental
compilation" as an excuse. I want incremental compilation as an improvement on
already fast compilation, not as a requirement.) I think this is a legitimate
complaint.
For everything else, I think you need a different language. There are so many
languages which cover common use cases, just pick one:
* Pony, Crystal, Swift, ...
* If you want a C replacement, use Zig, which is a very good language with
its own niche.
* If you want a C++ replacement, and you happen to believe (incorrectly) that
memory safety is actually a problem, use Rust. But memory safety is easy with
runtime analysis. Rust solves a non-problem. And it compiles very, very slowly.
For some applications, that's fine, but I deny that it's an "agile" language.
Nim is uniquely valuable as a replacement for Python, i.e. as an "interface"
language with excellent performance, good compilation time, and high "agility".
There's really nothing to compete with it.
