Really the only thing that Nim and Lisp have in common is very powerful 
metaprogramming. Aside from that - it's a very strange comparison...

Lisp is a family of programming languages, almost all of which are scripting 
languages without static typing. Most common Lisp implementations (ex. SBCL, 
and some might count Clojure) cannot produce lean high-performance executables, 
which is a big strength for Nim. [Kostya's 
benchmarks](https://github.com/kostya/benchmarks) show Nim being much more 
efficient than Lisp variants Racket and Chez Scheme.

Lisp is especially known for its peculiar 
[S-expression]([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-expression](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-expression))
 syntax, which now (adding up all Lisp and Scheme flavors) has less than 1% 
[market share](https://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/). A small minority of 
programmers like it, but the vast majority don't, and would probably find it 
difficult to read your code or contribute to your project. Nim's syntax 
philosophy is shared with Python (soon to become undisputed as the most popular 
scripting language), and so it's less peculiar than Lisp to people coming from 
other top programming languages.

Related: [Make a Lisp in Nim](https://hookrace.net/blog/make-a-lisp-in-nim/) 
(2015)

Reply via email to