> I do not fully understand the sorting in each category, seems to be mostly > alphabetical, but not strict, and what is about lower case and upper case?
I didn't follow any order, mostly adding a new link under a category when discovering a new package. When there were too many packages, I tried to refine the category breaking it in sub-categories. > You wrote about prefering pure packages. Note that wNim and gintro are > bindings for example. And high quality bindings may feel like pure Nim libs, > so maybe including in the list is OK, maybe mark with (b)? I was not strict on that point and did not sort the packages like the standard lib does: _Nim 's library is divided into pure libraries, impure libraries and wrappers._ _Pure libraries do not depend on any external *.dll or lib**.so binary while impure libraries do. A wrapper is an impure library that is a very low-level interface to a C library._ But this definition has been extended to not include package wrapping Web services, as the core of the work is not done by Nim code. I just wanted to show what can be done with Nim, what a newcomer to the Nim ecosystem can expect to use and where she can create new libraries. I did not want to reproduce nimble list but to produce a list of packages most demonstrative of Nim strengths (and weaknesses). Yes, you could add a (b) marker or other tag to bindings if you want. This list is only a starting point for newcomers. Then they have to explore the packages and see if they fit their needs and adopt Nim development. > Maybe you can add category microcontroller/embedded? That one may be not well > populated, but is important, and I think there are some candidates. Everybody can add new categories and sub-categories. Or change the taxonomy of classes, if they feel that's not the best structure. > One more question, may we insert a single packages under multiple categories? > I guess it would make sense in rare cases, for example my Delaunay CDT can be > grouped under Graphics algorithms or Data structures. At the beginning, I put the same packages in multiple categories. But later, I used human hyperllinks (i.e. `@see Categorie > ... > Sub-Categorie`) to refer to complementary packages. Sometimes, it's difficult to know and find which category fits best a package.
