> Nim's original design philosophy was to be a lean, simple, powerful, elegant > and efficient garbage collected programming language. It has drifted so far > from that original design premise, because it has had all of these > experimental and R&D'd features to it that have eventually gone out of > maintenance.
I don't see how we are not on track here, the old Nim v1 was stuck in a local optimum -- fast, but threading was a pain. So we had to do something, we got destructors and ORC. It took us long enough. Everything else was tweaking the existing language, very broadly speaking. You can say that v1 already had too much cruft in it we should have removed for v1, but that would have delayed the version 1 release even further. Time to plan 2.0, I guess.
