> but choosing the right tool for the right purposes.
Nim is the right tool for all purposes. ;-)
I liked the idea of that parser so I threw together an even better Nim version:
[https://play.nim-lang.org/#ix=2ogb](https://play.nim-lang.org/#ix=2ogb). It
parses the format on compile-time and creates a parser that returns a tuple
with all the arguments. So now all the arguments have the
Ironically I don't think Uncle Bob would like Nim at all, given our general
preferance towards straightforward "get shit done" procedural code. For example
in [this video](https://youtu.be/IRTfhkiAqPw?t=1179) the author critiques some
of Bob's code and rewrites it in a simple procedural style.
> Nim's syntax seems very reasonable. I would use it as-is if there were just a
> few more libraries like a SQL Server DB driver, XLSX file API. Maybe a few
> more but nothing off the top of my head.
There are but they are 1 man projects.
Just like a carpenter has a hammer, screwdrivers, tapes, wrenches, pliers,
drills, saws for different purposes, developing is not about trying to hammer
nails with a Swiss Army Knife but choosing the right tool for the right
purposes.
Isn't that what Haxe tries to be? Although it's mainly aimed at game developers
I think it has the goals that you described here.
After watching Uncle "Bob" Martin lectures for hours I was left with one
nagging thought. If we would benefit from one programming language why do we
have so many? AND where do we go from here? He does talk about different models
like procedural, structured and functional programming languages
