Secondly, it shows that Nim has not found an audience with people fond of
mathematical and programming challenges.
Run
There may be people interested in mathematics (and its applications) but not in
programming challenges that are generally more attractive for students.
When I was a student I implemented some of the Euler's challenges in Haskell
and I think Ocaml (it's been along time), but today with a limited time I'm
more interested at implementing things that are more useful and related to my
work.
I'm my self a "mathematician" (now converted to an ML and CV engineer) and I
noticed that multiple members of the community are in fact scientists or work
in domains related to ML.
For the little story I followed rust for years looking at it as a replacement
for C++, but was quiet disappointed with the lake of interest in scientific
computing from the rust team (the language make it VERY hard and very ugly to
work on generic numeric types + problems with the borrow checker). What
interest me in Nim is precisely its potential for scientific computing.
So I think this numbers should be taken with a grain of salt (but I agree with
you that Nim is less popular than the languages you mentioned, lets hope this
will change after v1.0)
