Nim Nuggets: Nim talk at Strange Loop 2021

[jfondren]

On Monday, 18 October 2021 at 11:22:10 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
> Wrong, it was in response to "About 50% of it is inadvertent 
> praise for D.", because naturally for some people when any 
> language has something that somehow resembles D, it was copied 
> from D, regardless of prior art.

There are two twin siblings. One is praised for having good looks 
and good grades. This praise is described as "50% inadvertent 
praise for the the other twin". Do you conclude that one child 
stole other's looks or grades?

You might if you had an axe that needed grinding. But most people 
would get the joke: the other twin's grades are poor.

If you'd watched any amount of the presentation before replying, 
you'd see there's lots of praise for things that can't even be 
"copied from D", like praise for a fast compiler, and there's 
also lots of praise that doesn't apply to D at all. It's about 
50% unintentional praise for D, which I think makes it more of 
interest to a D audience. Do I need add a disclaimer any time 
this happens? "Here's a cool presentation about Kotlin. About 20% 
of it is inadvertent praise for D. My lawyers have advised me to 
include this addendum to this post: Common Lisp was standardized 
in 1994 with closures."

> And apparently some are quite touchy to facts.

Part of your 'facts' are accusing Walter of simply lying about 
his memories of ctfe and its reception, as if everyone in all 
programming communities was obliged to be constantly aware of 
every innovation anywhere in computing. The average compiler 
developer, shown Forth, was going to say "well, yeah, if you have 
a single pass compiler and are constantly compiling into an 
interactive environment, I guess you could get compile-time 
interaction this way, but I don't see how I could do anything 
like that."