> So it is that exact case mentioned in Sean Parent's presentation :), right ?
Yeah, but it's a bug in the library, not the language. A better criticism would be that the language has not settled. I'd rather not waste time on fixing "threadpool" until 2.0 is available. (I suspect that the global threadpool crashes would not happen with ORC.) But has C++ settled yet? Has Go? Has Java? Anyway, I'm not saying the criticism is invalid. I'm only saying it's not a reason to avoid Nim. It's good constructive criticism.
