What is the best alternative to Xonsh (The Xonsh Shell)?

Question

Built By the Slant team

Find the best product instantly.

4.7 star rating

Try it now - it's free

score 9 · Answer 1

rc (shell)

Top Pro

Simple

rc is a very simple and easy to learn shell. See More

Top Con

Lacks return statement

rc has no return statement. See More

Top Pro

C-like syntax

rc has very C-like syntax, which is very helpful for people who are used to C-like programming languages and will find rc's syntax very enjoyable. For example: for (i in `{seq 1 100}) { echo $i } See More

Top Pro

Sane array handling

In rc $array expands to the whole array and if one of the elements of the array has spaces in it, it's still considered one single element after the array variable expansion. See More

9 0

score 211 · Answer 2

fish (Friendly Interactive SHell)

Top Pro

Auto suggestions

fish suggests commands as you type, based on command history, completions, and valid file paths. As you type commands, you will see a completion offered after the cursor, in a muted gray color (which can be changed with the fish_color_autosuggestion variable). However, you can NEVER turn them off! See More

Top Con

Not POSIX compliant

Being POSIX-compliant may be essential to some, but it is not the be-all-and-end-all. Much of the trouble with POSIX-compliant shells is BECAUSE of POSIX, since it captures the poor behavior and syntax that existed. In most cases, POSIX-compliance is a fool's errand since there are significant differences between implementations of even the same shell (e.g., Bash, etc.) on various platforms. Although fish tries not to break POSIX compatibility without a good reason, and despite efforts to implement a compatibility mechanism, you can face some issues if POSIX compatibility is expected/required. Though, enthusiasts fix these cases. For example, add set shell=sh in your .vimrc to solve the issue for vim. See More

Top Pro

Excellent documentation

It has a great tutorial. And the official documentation is clear, full of eloquent examples, and to the point. See More

Top Con

Doesn't support history expansion ("!!")

Fish has no support for !!, but you can use Oh My Fish shell framework and install bang-bang plugin to have this shortcut in Fish shell. The downside of using bang-bang is that it takes over ones default key bindings, for those that don't use them it should not be an issue but for those that do it is an annoyance to be considered. For sudo !!, this can also be achieved by making this custom function: function sudo if test "$argv" = !! eval command sudo $history[1] else command sudo $argv end end See More

Top Pro

Already set up for you

While other shells require a lot of set up to act the way you want them to and to have some useful features, fish works perfectly out of the box. It has all the most widely used features baked in and are there out of the box without having the need to install plugins or tweak any configuration files. See More

Top Con

Very slow

Much of the functionality in Fish was not written with performance in mind. However, scripting in a shell is not supposed to be about performance. If you need it, use a full-blown programming environment to get it. Shells are for gluing the high-performance tools together. See More

Top Pro

Pretty usable even without plugins

Everything you need from oh-my-zsh is available on default fish, don't need to install any plugins. And even better, fish is smaller than zsh. See More

Top Pro

Universal variables

You can define Universal variables, which are shared instantaneously through all running fish sessions and persists through shell restarts. See More

Top Pro

Interactive searchable history

Fish has by far the best way to work with history, everything is automatically searchable. It works in the way you expect. No learning required. See More

Top Pro

Adding, removing and editing aliases is extremely easy

Top Pro

Creates completion files from manual pages

Fish_update_completions parses manual pages installed on the system, and attempts to create completion files in the fish configuration directory. See More

Top Pro

Fisherman ⚑ A fast, modern plugin manager for fish

Large test coverage, micro-second shell start, compatibility with plugins from other existing frameworks such as Tackle, Oh My Fish and Wahoo, cache system, offline index, the Fishery and other features. See More

Top Pro

Intuitive shell expansion in "for" loops

Unlike bash, this won't return you string *.sh if no .sh files are found for filename in *.sh echo "$filename" end See More

Top Pro

Less ambiguous lists

Here is a sample. Notice that there are 2 files with spaces in names. ls produces a valid list, and for loop correctly iterated through its values. ➤ for a in (ls); ls -l $a; end -rw-rw-r-- 1 sashka sashka 0 Apr 19 03:16 alma mater.txt -rw-rw-r-- 1 sashka sashka 0 Apr 19 03:16 whatever i want.txt sh scripts tend to be fragile when there are lists containing values with spaces. Also: ➤ echo $PATH /usr/bin /bin /usr/sbin /sbin /usr/local/bin ➤ echo $PATH[1] /usr/bin ➤ echo $PATH[-1] /usr/local/bin See More

Top Pro

High portability

Because it needs very little configuration to work properly, you can use Fish everywhere. If you are working on a system you don't usually work, installing Fish from the repository is easy and will give you the same experience as the installation on your own machine without having to drag a dotfile around. See More

Top Pro

Auto indentation when creating functions

When writing functions in an interactive shell, it will auto-indent as needed for if, for, function, etc. See More

Top Pro

Awesome, consistent, not-confusing sytax

The following, for example: for file in (find . -name "*.foo" -type f) fgrep -H "something" $file echo "hello" $file end | grep -v "hello" Will run the for loop, take all the stdout from it (both the fgrep and echo), and then pipe it through the final grep command. See More

Top Pro

Configuration framework for fish shell

Fish community maintains Oh My Fish, which is a shell framework inspired on Oh My Zsh awesome design and name. It offer a lot of beautiful prompt themes and awesome plugins, is lightweight, awesome and very simple to use. See More

See All Experiences

211 27

score 308 · Answer 3

zsh

Top Con

Not fully compatible with bash

There is a small chance you may have a bash script that doesn't work in zsh, although this is very very rare and most developers will never run into any issues. See More

Top Pro

Interactive autocompletion

When you start typing a command, you can press the tab key and it will complete the command you started typing. If there are multiple potential commands, you can choose which one to run by simply pressing tab again. Case-insensitive by default, too. See More

Top Con

Requires a lot of configuration to be used fully

Zsh requires a lot of tinkering with configuration files and downloading plugins in order to be able to do tasks which other shells may be able to do out of the box. See More

Top Pro

Powerful community-driven tools via oh-my-zsh

Oh-my-zsh is a community-driven framework, which helps users with their zsh configuration and plugins. 400 plugins, 200+ themes and auto-updates to always be up to date. See More

Top Con

Defaults are unfriendly for a long-time bash user

Expect to find a configuration you like (or use the configuration utility) to set reasonable preferences. Default zsh interaction is different enough to make you stutter through what used to be familiar workflows. See More

Top Pro

Autocomplete for options

Zsh intelligently determines if you are trying to complete a file path or an option, and pressing tab after typing - will reliably bring up a list of options. See More

Top Pro

Good bash compatibility

Things you've learned using bash will largely apply to zsh. Scripts written in bash will run with little to no modification. See More

Top Pro

Safer variable behaviour

Unlike Bash, zsh does not split unquoted variables by default, making it less error-prone. See More

Top Pro

Recursive globbing

ls **/*.log for example is supported by ZSH. See More

Top Pro

Great install procedure

Zsh will take you through a procedure which is roughly 30 minutes in length before during install. Through this procedure it asks you to set different options and customize the shell the way you want it to. Most of these settings are also found in other shells, but to customize them you have to go dig configuration files while zsh allows you to do it in the beginning. See More

Top Pro

Shared histories

If you spend a lot of time in the terminal, most likely you will have several terminal windows open. Zsh has great support for command line histories. The history is unique and shared through all the different instances. See More

Top Pro

Smart escaping

Zsh can determine the context of the command you're typing in and determine if it should escape characters if you're typing in a URI. See More

Top Pro

Pipe output to a temporary file:

Some programs don't support loading from stdin, but ZSH can store outputs to a temporary file, example: unzip =(curl http://example.com/someZipFile.zip) See More

Top Pro

Faster spelling correction

Zsh' s correct (or correctall) is vastly superior to Bash's attempt at spelling correction. See More

See All Experiences

308 43

score 140 · Answer 4

Bash (Bourne-Again SHell)

Top Pro

Default shell on most systems

Bash is the default shell on virtually every UNIX system. Making it very portable across different systems and once you get used to it, you can use it everywhere. See More

Top Con

Extremely complicated and inconsistent rules

In Bash, exceptions are the rule, not even all being described by the main page. There are a grand total of 5 different ways of quoting, sometimes even when one does not want to, for instance in command substitutions. These are all based around preserving the literal meaning of every character, with an exception list. There is even an exception list to the exception list in 4 of the 5, regarding how the backslash behaves! The behavior of the backslash is also one of the quoting rules, so naturally, it also has an exception in how it works when it stands before a newline as compared to other characters. Bash has several layers of interpretations, all to be kept in mind: The ~ expands to the home of the current user. So if you store it in a variable, can you use it that way? Nope: tilde expansion comes before variable expansion. Aha, so that's how it works! Then, since applying quotation happens after redirections are set up, it must mean that redirecting within quotes works, right? Nope: there is an exception! If a redirection symbol is not quoted, quotation around the symbol is observed, but is not removed. So, since variable expansion also comes after setting up redirections, and no exceptions are described here in the man page, getting the name of a file from a variable and using it as a target should not work, right? No: redirection does not actually take place when the symbols are being read, the symbols are merely removed and are noted for later, right before when the actual command runs. Apart from 5 types of quotation, there are basically 2 quoting phases, 2 word splitting phases (with only one being controllable), and a tokenization phase on top of that. If you have a command, it could be an alias, a special built in, a non-special built in, a symbolic link to a file, a regular file, a function, with different rules regarding how they can be overridden, if redirection happens before or after arguments have been passed (what does "time my_command 2>&1 >log_file" do?), etc. This list is admittedly long, but it doesn't even scratch the surface of the bloat, complexity and inconsistencies of Bash. See More

Top Pro

Plenty of examples and tutorials

Since this is very mature shell there is a lot of great examples and other resources describing how to do almost everything. See More

Top Con

GPL3 is not compatible with Apple's lawyers

Apple, one of the largest distributors of UNIX systems, only ships an ancient version of bash that predates the iPhone. No one knows why as Apple hasn't said, but the version Apple includes in MacOS is from right before the license was updated to version 3 of the GNU GPL (General Public License). Other major companies (IBM, Microsoft) have had no problem shipping the latest version of bash, so it's unclear what Apple's lawyers are averse to. The GPL has always said that if you distributed a program, you granted everyone the right to use it freely. The biggest change in version 3 was the addition, "...and that includes software patents." This was necessary because back in 2006 Microsoft was demanding that any company that uses Linux pay them or get sued for infringing on their patents. They even took some companies, like TomTom, to court. No software which can be restricted retroactively like that is truly free, so GPL 3+ includes a clause saying that if you distribute the program, then you are also granting license to any patents you own that are necessary to run it. What patents Apple has that bash could possibly infringe on is a mystery, but the bigger question is, Why does Apple even care? So what if they are granting people the right to run bash without being sued by Apple. It's not like they were planning on doing that, right? Even though it is not bash's fault that it is not Apple Lawyer-approved, this is a CON for it because a lot of people use Apple products. While there are methods like brew to install a current version of bash, Apple does not make it obvious to their customers what they are missing. See More

Top Pro

Rich scripting capabilities on a single line

Want to run something 5 times? Write a throw-away loop: for i in 1 2 3 4 5; do date; done If you need it 100 times? Not a problem: for i in {1..100}; do date; done or: for ((i=0; i<100; ++i)); do date; done How about emailing yourself when remote server is back online? Sure thing: while ! ping -c1 example.com &>/dev/null; do date; sleep 5; done && mailx -s 'server is back!' me@myself.com See More

Top Con

Compatibility can be a curse

One of bash's claims to fame is compatibility with previous versions of itself and historic shells. But, doing that means that new features are often written in tortured, awkward syntax that is not easy to learn. For example, bash uses the POSIX way of doing arithmetic: to add 5+3 you must put the numbers in double parentheses with a dollar sign at the start: x=$((5+3)). It is true that many shells suffer from this same CON, but since bash is such an important shell, it has less wiggleroom to ditch clunky ideas that might break existing scripts. See More

Top Pro

POSIX compatible

Top Con

Lags behind on features compared to ZSH and Fish

People who wants power features or to customize their shell experience use zsh or fish. See More

Top Pro

Emacs-like keyboard control

By default, BASH uses shortcuts and concepts very similar to Emacs, so learning one often results in familiarity with the other. See More

Top Con

Filename expansion is not consistent

filename expansion is not consistent. "echo *" will print the names of the files in your current dir, if there are any... and will print "*" if there are none. See More

Top Pro

Rich built-in features

By default, there are many built-in features. They make really complex and reliable programs possible. In comparison to dash, for example, you can do the same tasks in less time and fewer lines of code. See More

Top Con

Non-intuitive shell expansion in for loops

If there are no .sh files, this will print mask itself: for filename in *.sh; do echo $filename done See More

Top Pro

Variables and aliases are listed the way they are built

alias and set will list aliases and variables in a format that can be run directly with no modifications. Even if the values contain \n. This is handy if you want to modify a value. See More

Top Con

No out-of-the-box command autocompletion

To have command autocompletion in bash you need to install third-party plug-ins. See More

Top Pro

Recursive globbing

ls **/*.log for example is supported by Bash if you set shopt -s globstar. See More

Top Con

One of the most dangerous languages around

What it is mostly used for are file system operations. Guess what it is bad at? Operating on files. It automatically splits and carries out filename expansion on every single string resulting from variable expansion and command substitution unless quoted, by default on whitespace, whilst spaces are very common in filenames. Before that, it even does pathname expansion, so woe to anywone who does not want to actually operate on files, but has a globbing metacharacter stored anywhere in a variable. This means what you store in a variable is not going to be what will ACTUALLY be accessed. If an empty variable is unquoted, it disappears completely due to word splitting, sometimes leading to applications signalling a missing parameter at a wrong position. If quoted however, said variables cannot be iterated over in a loop, no matter what character one uses for word splitting. If you use any globbing pattern with a command, be sure to use -- after the option arguments or if none are present, before starting the pattern with a mandatory ./ Otherwise, another Bash script run gone wrong or a hacker can create files named like an option ("-f", for instance) and your program will happily accept it as such, if it results from globbing. For interactive use, it is convenient. For programming, it is a no-go. See More

Top Pro

Man page is a trove of wonders

While the manual "page" is nearly a hundred pages long, it is actually surprisingly succinct and stuffed with good information. It is often better than Googling for answers when writing shell scripts. The way it is written makes it easy to stumble upon useful new programming features just by flipping through it . NOTE: If you find it dense and hard to read at the command line, look for the PDF version. See More

Top Pro

vi mode is more comprehensive than on other shells

Vi editing mode works without a glitch. "_" will print you the last argument of the latest command (zsh won't). VI mode is fast off the bat - You don't have to reset any variable (like "KEYTIMEOUT" in zsh) for that. See More

Top Pro

Copyright license is GPL 3+

Bash is licensed under the GNU General Public License ≥3, which gives much stronger assurances that the right to use it can't be restricted. For example, Microsoft would not be able to claim in court that, even though they've distributed Bash with the GPLv3, a license that explicitly grants people freedom, now Bash is essentially proprietary due to software patents and everyone who uses Bash owes them money. (This may sound ludicrous to those who were not alive when Microsoft tried a similar scheme against Linux fifteen years ago). The GPLv3 is a license that reflects the genuine ethical issues that arise when people give their time and skills to collaboratively build software. While most people wouldn't insist that their UNIX shell is licensed under the GPLv3+, it does matter and is a big PRO for Bash. See More

Top Pro

Built-in 'help'... helps a lot

Built-in 'help' provides quick and efficient help on builtins and keywords. See More

Top Pro

Rich scripting capabilities

BASH scripting is a rich and robust language. See More

See All Experiences

140 26

score 23 · Answer 5

DASH

Top Con

Doesn't support all bash features

Dash does not support all bash features, sometimes called 'bashisms' unless explicitly pointed at /bin/sh. See More

Top Pro

Fast startup

Dash has a very fast startup, this happens because the shell is started a lot of times during boot and dash minimizes the work it does during this process. See More

Top Pro

Low memory usage, which matters a lot in embedded

It is designed to be very lightweight and has no support for shell specific extensions that are not POSIX. See More

Top Pro

Default shell on Debian systems

DASH is the default shell for Debian based systems due to it speed, full POSIX compliance and low overhead. See More

Top Pro

Full POSIX support

It's fully POSIX compatible, so if your script runs on dash it will probably run on all other shells. See More

Top Pro

A perfect clone

It's a clone of the original System V4 Bourne shell. See More

23 8

score 17 · Answer 6

tcsh (shell)

Top Pro

C-like shell

It's a C-like shell with tenex command-completion feature, which is very convenient. See More

Top Con

Limited support online

The support and number of guides and tutorials is rather limited for tcsh online because there are not many people who use it. At least compared to some of the other more popular alternatives. See More

Top Pro

Organized documentation

All the documentation that's needed to use tcsh is located in man tcsh instead of being spread on various helper programs. See More

17 9

score 9 · Answer 7

sh

Top Con

Not suitable for interactive use

The Bourne shell has always been criticized (most notably by Bill Joy, author of csh) as being unfriendly for interactive use. It has no tilde (~) expansion. Limited file test operators. Limited math operators. See More

Top Pro

Truely the most broadly available shell

It may not be the best if you want power, but if you want to write a POSIX script that will run everywhere, it's a pretty good choice. See More

Top Pro

Most influential Unix shell alongside csh

Bourne shell introduced features such as piping, here documents, command substitution, variables, control structures for condition-testing and looping and filename wildcarding. See More

9 7

score 11 · Answer 8

Hy

Top Pro

Python interop

Hy compiles to Python's abstract syntax trees. Python can import Hy modules, and Hy can import Python modules. See More

Top Pro

Easier to read

Distinguished between arrays (or vectors) and function calls by using [] and (), respectively. See More

Top Pro

Copyfree and open source

Uses the MIT (expat) license. See More

11 1

score 9 · Answer 9

V

Top Pro

Cross-platform

Compile app to run on different OSes. See More

Top Pro

Sum types

V has sum types. See More

Top Pro

GUI support

V comes with (simple) GUI support out of the box. See More

Top Pro

Clear syntax

Highly understandable language. See More

Top Pro

Safety

V is very safe. See More

Top Pro

Fast like C

V is easier than C and fast like C. See More

Top Pro

Closures

V has closures, which gives the user additional options and usefulness. See More

Top Pro

Generics

V has generics. See More

Top Pro

Supports concurrency and channels

Can run functions concurrently that communicate over channels. See More

Top Pro

C Interop

Can import C libraries, structs, and headers. See More

Top Pro

Fast compile times

Compiles programs fast, less waiting around, so more productive and fun. See More

Top Pro

Lambdas

Supports using lambdas, which helps write more concise code without having to use so many lines. See More

See All Experiences

9 1

score 12 · Answer 10

Ion (shell)

Top Pro

Supports type-checking of assignments

All variable assignments may optionally specify a type, which will enforce that the supplies value is compatible with that type before storing it, returning an error if there's a mis-match. See More

Top Con

Still in development

There's a number of paper cuts that have yet to be addressed. It's been progressing very rapidly though. Some features have yet to be implemented, some logic bugs have yet to be fixed, and it's not been tested much in the wild. Very early in it's life as of 2017. See More

Top Pro

Features slicing syntax

Arrays are sliced by elements, and strings are sliced by graphemes. See More

Top Con

Unubiquitous

There's a big advantage to picking a shell which is ubiquitous, since you are likely to work with more than your own systems, and likely want the same or a similar experience there. See More

Top Pro

Easy to learn

The entire Rust ecosystem is known for having excellent, modern documentation, and Ion is no exception. Couple that with it having far less cruft (ie fewer things to learn) some syntactic and conceptual inspiration from Rust, and suddenly you have a very easy to learn (and still very powerful) shell. See More

Top Pro

Distinguishes between arrays and strings

Generally more type-safe, enabling explicitness, and allowing for powerful slicing and method syntax. See More

Top Pro

Faster than all other system shells

Ion actually manages to be faster than Dash -- simultaneously using less memory and packing much more functionality. See More

Top Pro

A simple, modern, and clean syntax

Syntax is much simpler than other shells, leading to very elegant and succinct scripts and command invocations. See More

Top Pro

Written in Rust

Shells written in C are often riddled with memory-based vulnerabilities that lead to high profile security flaws that are continually discovered decades later. GNU Bash's Shellshock vulnerability, for example, is an example of a vulnerability that Rust prevents. Rust raises the bar for minimum code quality standards by enforcing various restrictions on type/variable usage, and therefore Ion provides a high quality code base from the start. See More

Top Pro

Can be compiled as a static binary

There are no dependencies on C or C libraries (except for the minimum required to run on Linux). By opting for the MUSL target toolchain, a fully static binary can be generated and distributed to systems. See More

Top Pro

Color namespace with 24-bit color syntax

It is exceptionally easy to use 24-bit colors in the shell with Ion's c/color namespace. echo ${c::0x09F}Bluish text${c::0x630bg}with a brownish background${c::reset} See More

Top Pro

Method syntax enables a new level of capabilities

Offers a unique concept of string and array methods, whereby invoking the name of a method, and supplying arguments to it, you can perform otherwise complex text manipulation at expansion time. Also supports recursively processing the results of method expansions within method expansions. See More

Top Pro

Supports a namespaces concept

A special syntax allows for obtaining values from within special namespaces -- either namespaces that are built into the shell, such as the color namespace, or from plugins, such as the git plugin. See More

Top Pro

Supports a plugin architecture

Plugins may be integrated within Ion using a C FFI. These plugins can add additional methods and namespaces. See More

Top Pro

May be used as a library

Ion shell is featured within the distributed Concurr application, by the same author of Ion, which creates embedded instances of the Ion shell in the server for executing commands locally. See More

See All Experiences

12 2

score 3 · Answer 11

Oh (shell)

Top Con

Unstable

It fails with errors and long Python tracebacks. See More

Top Pro

Concurrent

Because it's written in Go, Oh can also be thought of as a concurrent programming language. See More

Top Con

No configurable prompt

The only way to configure the prompt in order to use something else other than the default >, you have to change the source code of Oh. See More

3 1

score 3 · Answer 12

Boo

Top Pro

IDE support

The open-source #develop comes with Boo support. See More

Top Con

The documentation isn't as good as Python's

There are some Boo textbooks. You can also find examples of Boo's language features in the Git repository, but it doesn't seem to have a thorough description of the language itself like Python does. See More

Top Pro

Static type safety

This also improves performance as compared to IronPython. You can still use duck typing if you want, but you mostly don't need to since Boo can infer the type based on context. See More

Top Pro

Inter-operates with other .NET languages

Boo runs on the .NET platform, so you can pretty much use it for anything C# is good for. See More

Top Pro

One of Unity's supported languages

Use your Python skills to make games. See More

Top Pro

Familiar syntax

Boo's syntax was heavily influenced by Python's, but makes some improvements like macros and multi-line lambdas. See More

3 1

score 235 · Answer 13

Julia

Top Pro

Almost as fast as C

Julia runs almost as fast as (and in fact in some cases faster than) C code. See More

Top Con

Young language with limited support

Julia was released in 2012. Due to its short existence, there is a limited amount of support for the language. Very few libraries exist as of yet, and the community is still quite small (though growing quickly). See More

Top Pro

Strong dynamic typing

Dynamic and high level, but does not isolate the user from properly thinking about types. Can do explicit type signatures which is great for teaching structured thinking. See More

Top Con

1-based array and column major

This design probably comes from Matlab, but makes it unnatural to interface C and C++ and python. See More

Top Pro

Great standard REPL

Out of the box Julia has a very good Read-Eval-Print-Loop, which both completes functions and types, as well as completion based on history of previous statements. It integrates well with the shell and has an excellent online help system. See More

Top Pro

Nice regular syntax

Julia code is easy to read and avoid a lot of unnecessary special symbols and fluff. It uses newline to end statements and "end" to end blocks so there is no need for lots of semicolons and curly braces. It is regular in that unless it is a variable assignment, function name always comes first. No need to be confused about whether something is a method on an object or a free function. Unlike Python and Ruby, since you can annotate the types a function operates on, you can overload function names, so that you can use the same function name for many data types. So you can keep simple descriptive function names and not have to invent artificial function names to separate them from the type they operate on. See More

Top Pro

Written in itself

The Julia language is written in itself to a much larger extent than most other languages, so a budding programmer can read through the depths of the standard library and learn exactly how things work all the way down to the low-level bit-twiddling details, which can be englightening. See More

Top Pro

Powerful n-dimensional arrays

Julia has built in n-dimensional arrays similar in functionality as Python's numpy. See More

Top Pro

Function overloading

You can have multiple functions with the same name, but doing different things depending on function arguments and argument types. See More

Top Pro

Amazing learning curve

Julia requires no boilerplate code – a beginner needs to write only the parts they care about. This combined with the REPL provides the best learning experience available. See More

Top Pro

High-level code

Julia provides a high level of abstraction, making platform-independent programming trivial and easing the learning curve. See More

Top Pro

Function and operator broadcasting

You can perform operations on scalars, for example 2^2 or [1, 2, 3].^2. See More

Top Pro

Strong Metaprogramming

Julia allows you to edit Julia code in the language itself and write powerful macros. It is a great introduction to metaprogramming features See More

Top Pro

REPL-based

The Julia REPL allows quickly testing how some code behaves and gives access to documentation and package management immediately in the REPL. See More

Specs

Platforms:Windows, Linux, Mac, FreeBSD

Current stable version:1.5.3

Type Model:Dynamically Typed

See All Experiences

235 63

score 107 · Answer 14

Pharo

Top Con

Small community

But they are very friendly and supportive. Best help comes through the mailing lists so not always easily googlable. There is also a Slack community where help is nearly instantaneous. See More

Top Pro

Object-Oriented

In Pharo everything is an object. Compiler - object, network - object, method - also an object. And objects communicate with messages. No operators, no control-flow statements. Just objects and messages. Few things to learn, but you can learn OOP well. See More

Top Con

Odd language

Requires a different mindset. Much harder to apply what you know from popular or conventional languages . Switching over from or between other languages is more difficult. See More

Top Pro

Easily learnt

There is good, free documentation including several books written by experts with extensive examples. There is an online MOOC. There are many tutorial videos. Supportive conferences and community. Even a professional support option if desired. See More

Top Con

Single threaded

Pharo's VM only ever uses one CPU core. If you want to write code that uses more than one CPU core, you need to jump through hoops such as running multiple VMs and synchronising your data. See More

Top Pro

Live updates

The nature of Pharo being a "live" environment allows you to perform live updates to your system without requiring to restart it. You can upgrade/modify classes while serving requests at the same time. See More

Top Pro

Highly productive

Top Pro

Seaside

The framework for developing sophisticated web applications in Smalltalk is developed in Pharo. Seaside lets you build highly interactive web applications quickly, reusably and maintainably. See More

Top Pro

Remote debugging

Top Pro

Beautiful coding patterns in your IDE

No need to search google for compact beautiful examples of how to do things, your live environment source is available and you can easily live search, see how it works and copy how the masters would do it (examples most languages still copy too). See More

Top Pro

Glamorous toolkit & GTInspector

Most languages are still copying the Smalltalk tools of yesterday - GTInspector (written in Glamorous) takes live exploration of code/running objects to a new level. It's really slick, and better yet, you can easily write your own inspectors in 10 lines of code. See More

Top Pro

Code can be run on rock solid GemStone environment

Top Pro

64 bit support as of Pharo 7

Use 32 bit or 64 bit versions of Pharo on Windows, Mac & Linux. See More

Top Pro

Advanced code analysis tools

MOOSE environment provides extensive, easily leveraged and class leading tools for code analysis and improvement. See More

Top Pro

Can run headless for production

Top Pro

Really simple networking and REST with Zinc

Top Pro

Graphics, graphing and visualisation framework - Roassal

Roassal and Mondrian provide fantastic and easily used frameworks for graphics, graphing and advanced visualisations (comparable to D3.js) but with much less code. Visualisations can be rendered into web friendly graphics (SVG, .png etc.) without additional work. See More

Specs

Platforms:MacOSX; Linux; Windows

License:MIT

Auto Complete:Y

Typing discipline:Dynamically typed

See All Specs

See All Experiences

107 33

score 252 · Answer 15

Haxe

Top Pro

Compiles to multiple platforms and languages

Haxe allows you to develop for Web, iOS, Android, Blackberry, Windows, OSX, Linux and others, all at once, without the need to switch languages and maintain separate code bases. This is possible because Haxe can compile to JavaScript, ActionScript, Flash AVM bytecode, C++, Neko, PHP, C# (.NET) and Java. Support for even more platforms and languages is under development. See More

Top Con

Bad support in some popular IDEs

While it has great support in Visual Studio Code and Vim for example, it still lacks support in some IDEs such as IntelliJ. See More

Top Pro

Powerfully expressive but easy to learn

The language was designed to be very expressive with the smallest possible amount of syntactic sugar. There are actually fewer keywords than other languages with similar power. See More

Top Con

You need to code interfaces to work with existing JavaScript code

Some popular libs like JQuery have maintained externs, for any specific code or lib already in JS you have to write the externs to use it in your haxe application. See More

Top Pro

Extremely fast compilation

Haxe can easily compile over 100,000 lines of code to JS in seconds on a mid-spec computer. See More

Top Con

No Qt support

There is currently no support for Qt. See More

Top Pro

Similar to JavaScript and ActionScript 3

The language is very easy to learn for those with background in JavaScript or ActionScript 3. See More

Top Con

Full programs only

You can create small utility functions with Haxe, but generally it is a lot more work than with other JS compilers. Haxe is best used when you have a larger project. See More

Top Pro

Large library support. From servers to games.

Haxelib (common library repo) and other sources contain large codebases for anything from cryptography to communications. A lot of these are fully cross platform and work with the JavaScript target. The JavaScript target can be used for everything from node.js server applications (with code completion) to games using either the Flash-like OpenFL library or direct canvas or WebGL programming. See More

Top Con

It's not easy to convince people it's as good as it really is unless you can get them to really try it

Top Pro

Established project

Haxe has been around for more than 10 years (since 2005) and whilst not the most popular project, has had continuous growth. Highly unlikely to disappear or for support to stop. See More

Top Pro

Friendly community

Friendly community See More

Top Pro

Pick up errors at compile time

One big advantage over pure javascript, (or some other languages listed here) is that Haxe will pick up a whole range of errors when you compile, saving you the pain of having to try and debug them later. This includes everything from syntax errors ("Unexpected ;") to type errors ("Class user has no field username. Suggestion: username"). See More

Top Pro

First class code completion

Code completion is built into the compiler and available to the IDE allowing for much smarter code completion that can actually parse and understand the syntax tree. See More

Top Pro

Small, readable output

The output that is generated can be trimmed using "dead code elimination" to only include those functions and libraries that are strictly necessary. All code is very readable with only minimal extras for specific functionality. Small output is good for frontend development as file size is a major concern. See More

Top Pro

Powerful type inference with strong typing

After a type is inferred from its context, it cannot be changed to a new type, and type safety is done at compile time so it stays safe without the extra maintenance required for static typing. See More

Top Pro

Syntactic macros

Syntactic macros allow you to extend compiler features at the syntax tree step. Macros come into play after code is parsed into the abstract syntax tree, and macros allow you to transform it before the rest of the compilation completes. This provides for immense power, while at the same time scoping the extensibility at a level that is powerful, but well constrained. See More

Top Pro

Code reuse server side and client side

You can use the same classes on the server as you do on the client where applicable. This saves a lot of time. See More

Top Pro

Ability to use existing JS libraries

Haxe has the ability to use "externs". These are haxe files which describe the usage of existing JS libraries. Get code completion and compile-time-checking for everything from jQuery to Node.js. Even without externs, native JS code can still be used through untyped code. See More

Top Pro

Can create complex applications without needing webpack, npm or other crutches

Haxe has the power and expression to not need the npm dependancy hell that is common in js and typescript, bit it's still simple. See More

Top Pro

Algebraic data types and pattern matching.

Top Pro

Offload execution to the server with remoting

Using a remoting proxy you can get type safe server to client communications, allowing for remote method execution on the server as if they were part of the client side code. See More

Top Pro

Package management like Java

Package tree is just directory tree, it's wonderful! See More

Top Pro

Builtin conditional compilation support

Haxe supports conditional compilation, so depending on compiler flags Haxe will include or exlcude sections of your code. Making it easy to have debug and release builds. See More

Top Pro

Abstract enums allow constants with exhaustiveness check

You can define constants in an abstract enum and when used in a switch/case statement Haxe checks for exhaustiveness, making sure every constant is covered - with no runtime implication. See More

Top Pro

Type safety for exísting JS libraries

Haxe compiler will check types when using externs for existing libraries. See More

Top Pro

Available in NPM

Top Pro

Ability to skip type checking when calling non Haxe code

You should use externs when calling non Haxe code, but if you just need to call one or two external JS functions, you can skip type checking by calling untyped code. See More

Top Pro

Create without needing to be limited to a language, target, or commercial ecosystem

Top Pro

Abstracts allows me to create more intative api's without runtime overhead

Specs

Platforms:Web, iOS, Android, Blackberry, Windows, OSX, Linux

Supported languages:C++, C#, Java, Javascript, PHP, Lua, Python, Actionscript

See All Experiences

252 70

score 959 · Answer 16

Go

Top Pro

Simplified C-like syntax that is as easy to read and write as Python

The language is designed in a manner that seems logical. Syntax is simplified to reduce burden on the programmer and compiler developers. See More

Top Con

Golang controlled by Google

Solves Google problems, which might not be your or the majority of user's problems. Was created for the benefit and purposes of Google, so is less flexible in language direction and options. See More

Top Pro

Great team working behind it

Go has a solid team of engineers working on it (some of the best networking engineers in the world are working on Go). Up until now, the great engineering of the language has compensated for its lack of power. See More

Top Con

Hard to abstract even the simplest notions

Go is famously regarded as very simple. However, this simplicity becomes problematic in time. Programmers who use Go find themselves over and over again writing the same thing from a very low point of view. Domains not already served by libraries that are easy to glue are very difficult to get into. See More

Top Pro

Easy to install and configure; simple to compile software

Go software can be immediately installed, regardless of your operating system, package manager, or processor architecture with the go get command. Software is compiled statically by default so there is no need to worry about software dependencies on the client system. Makefiles and headers are no longer necessary, as the package system automatically resolves dependencies, downloads source code and compiles via a single command: go build. See More

Top Con

Forces K&R style and won't allow Allman style

Golang developers were extremely short-sighted and biased by forcing the K&R style, which should never have happened. Basically kicking Allman style users out of their language. See More

Top Pro

Programmers don't have to argue over what 10% subet of the language to implement in their software project

The language promotes programming in a specific idiomatic style, which helps keep every programmer on the same page. See More

Top Con

Doesn't have true enums

Golang does weirdness with const versus having real enums, like other languages. This reflects the stubbornness and shortsightedness of the core developers, similar to the issue with generics, where it was denied that it was needed until it became too obvious that it should have been added years ago. See More

Top Pro

Supports 'modules' in the form of packages

Every Go source file contains a package line that indicates which package a file belongs to. If the name of the package is 'main', it indicates that this is a program that will be compiled into a binary. Otherwise, it will recognize that it is a package. See More

Top Con

Does not have sum types

Makes it harder to have functions of different parameters types in a non OOP language. Thus messy generics and interfaces, and more confusion, where sum types could have solved a number of issues. See More

Top Pro

Demonstrates a unique, simple concept to object-oriented programming

All types are essentially objects, be they type aliases or structs. The compiler automatically associates types to their methods at compile time. Those methods are automatically associated to all interfaces that match. This allows you to gain the benefits of multiple inheritance without glue code. As a result of the design, classes are rendered obsolete and the resulting style is easy to comprehend. See More

Top Con

It appears Google uses position to snuff out or suppress other languages

Newer languages that could threaten Golang (or other Google controlled languages) appear to have suppressed search results on Google and YouTube. Dangerous situation where large company can manipulate user choice and market share. The freedom to freely choose and user rights need to be protected. See More

Top Pro

Great language for building networking services

Go was started as a systems language but now it has fully committed in the niche of networking services. This has been a brilliant move by Go because it allows them to capitalize on the immense talent of the Go engineering team (who are in the most part network engineers). In a world dominated by Java EE and slow scripting language, Go was a breath of fresh air and it continues to be one of the most powerful languages if you want to build networking services. See More

Top Con

Designed to make the programmer expendable

Go was designed for large team projects where many contributors may be incompetent. That Go can still get things done under these conditions is a testament to its utility in this niche. Go's infamously weak abstraction power is thus a feature, not a bug, meant to prevent your teammates from doing too much damage. This also means any team member can be easily replaced by another code monkey at minimum cost. Good for the company, bad for you. The more talented programmers, on the other hand, will be very frustrated by having one hand tied behind their back. See More

Top Pro

Exceptionally simple and scalable multithreaded and concurrent programming

Goroutines are "lightweight threads" that runs on OS threads. They provide a simple way for concurrent operations — prepending a function with go will execute it concurrently. It utilizes channels for communication between goroutines which aids to prevent races and makes synchronizing execution effortless across goroutines. The maximum number of OS threads goroutines can run on may be defined at compile time with the GOMAXPROCS variable. See More

Top Con

Easy to shadow variable

Due to single character only difference, declare and assign statement can easily shadow variable from outer scope unconsciously. Example: err := nil if xxx { err := somefunctionthatreturnsanerr } return err // always return nil See More

Top Pro

The go compiler compiles binaries instantly — as fast as a scripting language interpreter

Compiled binaries are fast — about as fast in C in most cases. Compiles on every OS without effort — truly cross-platform compiler. As a result of the fast compilation speed, you can use the gorun program to use go source code as if it was a scripting language. See More

Top Con

No forms designer

Those who are used to Visual Studio can feel the lack of a forms designer for rapid development. See More

Top Pro

Performance is on the order of C and Java

Go is blazing fast, but easier to write than Python, JS, Ruby, or many other dynamic languages. See More

Top Con

Bizarre syntactic choices like a unique date format.

Top Pro

Jobs available

You can find a Job knowing Go. Which is more than can be said with many other languages. See More

Top Con

Changing visibility requires renaming all over the code

Top Pro

API documentation is rich in content; easy to memorize

Only features deemed critical are added to the language to prevent cruft from working its way into the language. The language is small enough to fit inside one's head without having to repeatedly open documentation. Documentation is hosted on an official webpage in a manner that is simple to read and understand. See More

Top Con

Lacks support for immutable data

Only way to prevent something from being mutated is to make copies of it, and to be very careful to not mutate it. See More

Top Pro

Supports functional programming techniques such as function literals

This naturally also supports first class and high order functions, so you may pass functions as variables to other functions. See More

Top Con

Performance slowdown because of indirect calls and garbage collection

Practically no meaningful Go application can be written without indirect function calls and garbage collection, these are central to Go's core infrastructure. But these are major impediments to achieving good performance. See More

Top Pro

Multiple variables may be assigned on a single line

This conveniently eliminates the need to create temporary variables. Fibonacci example: x, y = y, x+y See More

Top Con

Implementation of interfaces are difficult to figure out

Finding out what interfaces are implemented by a struct requires a magic crystal ball. They are easy to write, but difficult to read and trawl through. See More

Top Pro

Built-in unit testing

The idiomatic approach to writing a Go software project is to perform test-driven development with unit testing. Every source code file should have an associated *_test.go file which tests functions in the code. See More

Top Pro

Provides tools for automatically formatting code for your entire software project

This helps keep every programmer on the same page in a project and eliminates arguments over formatting styles. See More

Top Pro

Automatically generates API documentation for installed packages

Godoc is provided to automatically generate API documentation for Go projects. Godoc also hosts its own self-contained web server that will list documentation for all installed packages in your Go path. See More

Top Pro

Supports splitting source code into multiple files

As long as every source code file in a directory has the same package name, the compiler will automatically concatenate all of the files together during the compilation process. See More

Top Pro

Syntax for exported code from a package is simplified to be less verbose than other languages

Any variable, type and function whose name begins with a capital letter will be exported by a project, while all other code remains private. There is no longer a need to signify that a piece of code is 'private' or 'public' manually. See More

Specs

Platforms:Windows, Linux, Mac etc.

Developer:Google with Ken Thompson, Robert Griesemer, Rob Pike

Current stable version:1.21.0

See All Experiences

959 235

score 165 · Answer 17

Common Lisp

Top Pro

Carefully designed for interactive use

Almost all aspects of the language are designed with interactive/repl use in mind. See More

Top Pro

Very Powerful REPL with SLIME

SLIME (Superior Lisp Interaction Mode for Emacs). See More

Top Pro

Condition/restart system

It is easy to recover from errors. Error resolution can be determined by the user at the REPL. See More

Top Pro

Image based runtime

The state of the program may be saved and reloaded as an image, supporting safer modification of the running program. New code may be compiled into the image as the program runs, while late binding ensures that symbol redefinitions take effect throughout the program. See More

Top Pro

Almost as fast as, or faster than, C

Some compilers such as SBCL can be faster than C or other low-level languages, and most compilers can generate fast native code. See More

165 64

score 176 · Answer 18

Smalltalk

Top Pro

Environment of live objects

You can modify the system as it's running. You're "swimming with the fish", instead of probing a black box by remote control. See More

Top Con

OO is becoming obsolete

Smalltalk did it best, but the whole paradigm is a poor fit for the expected future multicore processors. Isolated mutable variables with no compile checks is a recipe for race conditions in multithreaded code. Beginners would be better off learning a functional language. See More

Top Pro

Easy to learn and experiment

Top Con

Not common

Smalltalk missed an opportunity to become mainstream when its implementations cost $5000 per seat versus $0 open source. New open source implementations (Pharo, Squeak) have minor corporate backers but not yet an IT behemoth. Direct jobs are scarce (but indirectly Smalltalk experience is very well regarded). Online communities are relatively small. See More

Top Pro

Inspector makes objects transparent

Programmers must make detailed mental models of the system they are developing. Bugs usually happen when the mental model does not match the actual system. This is one of the greatest difficulties beginners have because most systems are so opaque. It takes a lot of effort to see what's really going on. But in Smalltalk this is much easier, thanks to the powerful tools included in the environment, like the object inspector. See More

Top Con

Not useful for mobile development

While Smalltalk is very powerful and easy to learn, it doesn't have a well supported mobile distribution, but you'll be spoiled for working in mainstream languages like Java, Swift or Kotlin where jobs are more readily available. See More

Top Pro

Superb Integrated Development Environment (IDE)

All tools (Inspector, Browser, Debugger etc.) are written in Smalltalk and are live objects in the environment. All sources are present, so that the tools can easily be studied, changed and experimented with. The same goes for the other components like the compiler, OS-Integration etc. See More

Top Con

Virtual machine in its own isolated world

Smalltalk wants to be the whole OS. While this has tremendous advantages internally, interacting with the world outside the VM is not as easy as pure Smalltalk and must be done via a Foreign Function Interface. See More

Top Pro

Pure and easy object orientation

Smalltalk is one of few languages that are purely object oriented. This provides a solid and easy to understand base on which to learn object oriented programming, the most popular approach to programming. See More

Top Con

Non-standard arithmetic ordering

Since every operation is considered a message sent sent is a specific order, all arithmetic operators have the same precedence. E.g. 2 + 3 x 4 translates to 2 + 3, and the result is multiplied by 4, giving an answer of 24 (instead of the correct answer - 14). Once you are learn this, it can easily handled using brackets, e.g. 2 + (3 x 4), but still a momentary suprise for beginners. See More

Top Pro

Elegant syntax fits on a postcard

The syntax was designed to be easy enough for children to learn. Beginners can learn the language rules very quickly and then focus on programming without fighting the syntax at the same time. Things that have to be baked into the grammar in other languages are simple message sends with block arguments in Smalltalk. Expressions have only three precedence levels to worry about. See More

Top Pro

Agile "interactive" test-driven development

Smalltalk had the original (and still the best) unit test system that inspired it in many other languages (like Java's JUnit). Working with interactive live objects in Smalltalk style TDD makes it easy to teach and learn TDD. See More

Top Pro

Powerful integrated debugger

You can edit code and swap it in while the program is still running after an exception has already been signaled, or restart from anywhere in the call stack. You can inspect and modify the state of any object. Some Smalltalkers write unit tests and then program exclusively in the debugger. See More

Top Pro

Internal source code and documentation

You can explore how everything works easily. See More

Top Pro

Incremental compilation

Smalltalk provides an extremely fast code-compile-run-debug cycle. You don't have to stop and reset the world to tweak your program, since you can compile one method at a time while the environment is still running. This is great for beginners to experiment and prototype ideas. See More

Top Pro

Inspired many other languages' object systems

Top Pro

Open source

MIT licensed implementations Pharo, Squeak, Cuis & Dolphin and GPL licensed GnuSmalltalk. See More

Top Pro

Save and restore virtual machine image

A Smalltalk environment can save the state of a running program and later restore and resume execution. This includes the internal state of live objects, multiple thread stacks, and debugging sessions, making it easier for beginners to take the exact problem to an expert for assistance. See More

Top Pro

Language uniformity

This leads to a very simple programming model (pure OO) that is still very powerful. A lot of stuff that is hard to implement in other languages is easier in Smalltalk. See More

Top Pro

Graphical user interface

Beginners are usually stuck making command-line applications in other languages, because GUIs are too hard. Smalltalk GUIs are easy enough to start with. See More

Top Pro

First-class functions with lexical closures

Also known as "blocks". These objects contain reusable snippets of code and as first-class objects they can be passed as arguments to other methods or blocks and also returned from them. "lexical closures" mean they retain access to the variables in the lexical environment they were written in, that is, in the surrounding code. See More

Top Pro

It invented a lot of stuff

Smalltalk is the inventor of Just-in-Time compilation and the MVC concept, refactoring through their so-called refactoring browser and it was also one of the first adopters of a language virtual machine, closures, live programming, test driven development, an IDE and the development of GUI`s. See More

Top Pro

As a first language, almost forces you to learn OO design

Hybrid languages (e.g., Java, C#, C++) make it easy to slip into procedural thinking. Smalltalk's pure OO approach makes it hard not to think in object-oriented terms. In addition, since the entire IDE and runtime components are there in the image for you to browse, you have plenty of examples of good OO design to learn from. See More

Top Pro

Provides a functional way to interact with objects

Many languages today use object orientation, while the most of them stock on the half way in that perspective. Smalltalk sees literally everything as an object and this includes things like the classes and primitive data types. There is are zero control structures such as selection and iteration, since all is done by sending messages to objects. It use a lot of concepts from Lisp in order to provide a nice experience for this pure kind of object orientation. It provides immutable data structures, closures, anonymous functions and higher order functions, while all those functions are objects. This is what makes Smalltalk so simple, elegant, and easy. All this counts for Pharo, while other implementations as Amber are probably feature complete to it. See More

Specs

OS:Windows, macOS, Linux

Current stable version:6.1

GZipped size:38MB

IDE Support:Self-Hosted

See All Experiences

176 73

score 182 · Answer 19

Racket

Top Pro

Realm of Racket is an excellent entry-level guidebook

Realm of Racket teaches the big-bang approach for managing world state. It does so by walking the reader through the development of small games. There are few guidebooks that are as useful and entertaining. See More

Top Pro

Racket was designed to teach functional programming from the start

Racket is based on Scheme (LISP Family) and is very similar to Clojure. So there are a ton of (). The reason it is easier to learn is that it is not trying to be "Pure" if there is even such a thing in terms of Functional Programming. The great thing about Racket is it has everything included. You get DrRacket for developing programs. You want to add a picture to your software you can insert pictures. If you want to add libraries just open the package manager. The Syntax is an opinion but it really does feel easier to see what is happening since everything is in brackets) Racket is a really a Programming Language for making Programming Languages. So there are smaller syntax Racket called Student Racket which makes things easier to pick up. See More

Top Pro

Free resources to Learn

Includes several free online books and great documentation. See More

Top Pro

Great RPEL IDEA included Dr. Racket

Top Pro

Active community

Racket has an active community of users/developers that makes it easy to get help when needed. See More

Top Pro

Syntax fits to functional programming

Although syntax is different from that of mainstream languages, S-expressions are a perfect match to functional programming. See More

Top Pro

Subtly encourages functional programming

Racket makes it inconvenient to pursue imperative habits while encouraging functional programming by Lisps's syntax. For example, the syntax for defining a function is almost the exact same as defining a variable. In addition, Racket has a strong set of higher-order functions built in to the language. See More

Top Pro

Easily embeddable

Racket is famously embedded in the game engine underlying Naughty Dog's Uncharted and The Last of Us games, because it proved to be so easy to embed. See More

Specs

Platforms:Linux, Windows, OSX

Price:Free

Current stable version:8.5

Site:https://racket-lang.org

See All Specs

See All Experiences

182 80

score 490 · Answer 20

Nim

Top Pro

Great metaprogramming features

There are generics, templates, macros in Nim. They can allow you to write new DSL for your application, or avoid all boilerplate stuff. See More

Top Pro

Strict typing

Checks your code at compile time. See More

Top Pro

Has built-in unittest module

With built-in "unittest" module you can create test with a very readable code. See More

Top Pro

Compile-time execution

Nim has a built-in VM, which executes macros and some other code at compile time. For example, you can check if you're on Windows, and Nim will generate code only for it. See More

Top Pro

Has built-in async support

Nim has "asyncdispatch" module, which allows you to write async applications. See More

Top Pro

Really cross-platform

The same code can be used for web, server, desktop and mobile. See More

Top Pro

Easy to read

Nim has a lot of common with Python in terms of syntax. Indentation-based syntax, for/while loops. See More

Top Pro

Multi paradigm

Imperative, OOP, functional programming in one language. See More

Top Pro

Easy to integrate with another languages

You can use Nim with any language that can be interfaced with C. There's a tool which helps you to create new C and C++ bindings for Nim - c2nim. Also, you can use Nim with Objective C or even JavaScript (if you're compiling for these backends). See More

Top Pro

Garbage-collected

You don't need to deal with all those manual memory allocations, Nim can take care of it. But also you can use another GC, or tweak it for your real-time application or a game. See More

Top Pro

Type interferencing

You only need to specify types in your procedures and objects - you don't need to specify type when you're creating a new variable (unless you're creating it without initialization). See More

Top Pro

Built-in Unicode support

You can use unicode names for variables, there is "unicode" module for operations with unicode. See More

Top Pro

Supports UFCS (Unified Function Call Syntax)

writeLine(stdout, "hello") can be written as stdout.writeLine("hello") proc add(a: int): int = a + 5 can be used like 6.add.echo or 6.add().echo() See More

Specs

Platforms:Windows, MacOS/iOS, Linux /Android/Termux, *BSD, Solaris/SmartOS, HaikuOS, lots of others

License:MIT

CPU:All CPU architectures that have an ANSI C compiler or JavaScript interpreter

Current stable version:2.0.0

See All Specs

See All Experiences

490 195