> int - the generic signed integer type; its size is platform dependent "generic" means something like "vanilla" here, not "generic type". The choice of words is a newbie trap.
As to your results: > the int refers to specific type rather than a type class Yes, see above. > the type int is distinct from int64, even on a 64bit platform > > int64 is not implicitely convertible to int Yes, for a reason: `int` is designed to be platform-dependent, `int64` is not. The compiler treating them as equivalent would be a bad idea. Even types which are identical on every platform can be distinct, we even have a keyword for it: `type myInt = distinct int`. Nim generally doesn't do many automatic type conversions out of the box, that's intentional. > the type class int does not include the type int64 , i.e. It's not a type class, see above
