I'm a big fan of Nim, and while I love Python, I keep finding more ways to use Nim instead of Python because it means if my proof-of-concept in Nim gets popular, I can avoid making trade-offs in scaling (due to performance).
Eventually, Nim could find itself on the TIOBE top 50 to 30 rankings. That would put it among known languages such as D, Scala, and Haskell. Which might not seem like much, but considering all the new programming languages that are out here now, it is actually quite significant. The competition among newer languages (Rust, Crystal, Zig, Vlang, Odin, Julia...) vying for attention and to replace some of the older ones is fierce.
Basically, it's just too complicated and all over the place.
Copying bad design is not good design.
If the compiler cannot reason about the code, neither can the programmer.
Don’t get in the programmer’s way.
Move work to compile-time: Programs are run more often than they are compiled.
Customizable memory management.
Concise code is not in conflict with readability, it enables readability.
(Leverage meta programming to keep the language small.)
Optimization is specialization: When you need more speed, write custom code.
There should be one and only one programming language for everything. That language is Nim.
If I wanted Zen of Python I'd just keep programming in Python ...For me it's like Python in the sense that I can bang out a quick, single-file program on a whim, but if it starts growing beyond that Nim is really fast, expressive, and portable. I can cross-compile a binary for any common platform (Nintendo Switch even), and then just send it over and run it.
And wrapperless C++ interop through macros: https://github.com/n0bra1n3r/cinterop