> Nim is the only language I've seen that has been able to reasonably extend > that far across a tech stack while still maintaining sane syntax and > semantics.
Yes, for me that's Nim's top selling point, one could call it abstraction level scaling. It would be okay to market the language as "a type safe python" or "some of the best parts of C++, Rust and Go combined" to different audiences, if these labels are half-way true. But the core thing of Nim is IMHO that it lets you write everything from a device driver to a high-abstraction-level application. Without learning every detail of the tons of powerful features which were bolted onto C++ over the years, without wrestling the compiler over the ownership of everything like in Rust, without the awful limitations of Go and without puking every high-level abstraction in the source code on the shoes of the run-time like JavaScript. Two main features which support this are IMHO type classes (concepts and generics) and meta-programming (templates and macros). If these are implemented well and function together well (and they **have** to), I will be much less nervous about Nim's future.
