

Nimrod programming language - prog
http://force7.de/nimrod/index.html

======
srean
From the docs:

    
    
      Case is insignificant in Nimrod and even underscores are ignored: 
      This_is_an_identifier and ThisIsAnIdentifier are the same identifier.
      This feature enables you to use other people's code without bothering
      about a naming convention that conflicts with yours. It also frees you
      from remembering the exact spelling of an identifier (was it parseURL
      or parseUrl or parse_URL?).
    

This has been discussed on Reddit before. I do not like this convention. Its a
nuisance if you want to search the code for a particular identifier when it
has been spelled in multiple ways. I find it jarring to read code where the
same variable has been spelled differently. My brain flags it every time and I
have to remind myself that they are the same thing. I can possibly retrain my
brain, but I do not want to do that because in almost all other contexts case
and underscore does matter.

To me it appears to solve a problem that isnt much of a problem. It is fairly
easy to detect misspelled identifiers during code compilation.

~~~
meric
That is horrible. I like to name my classes e.g "Object" and call instances of
that class with the lower case equivalent.. "object".

------
Jach
There are a lot of awesome things about this (it's like a semi-perverse grab
bag of my favorite languages!), but some aesthetic decisions that rub me the
wrong way unfortunately... Still, I'm going to keep an eye on it, and push it
just below Perl 6 on my List of Languages to Really Learn.

One of the nicest bits that kept my interest:

    
    
        # There are bindings to GTK2, the Windows API,
        the POSIX API, OpenGL, SDL, Cario, Python, Lua,
        TCL, X11, libzip, PRCE, ODBC, libcurl, mySQL
        and SQLite.

------
srean
Some older comments are here <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=606892>

------
wbhart
I'm stunned. I've spent a year looking for a language with that set of
features, and I mean, I really tried!

There's a few odd choices. The use of some fairly bizarre operators for
unsigned integer arithmetic is slightly weird (a bit like *. for floating
point operators in O'Caml). And it seems to be bootstrapped from Pascal, which
is a curious choice given that it compiles to C. There's also no built-in
bignum type, (though this has the positive benefit that the author is still
free to license it BSD - use GMP for bignums removes that possibility).

------
Groxx
Will definitely have to investigate this with a less-sleepy brain. I very much
like what I'm sure I parsed correctly, though :) Ease of metaprogramming +
native compilation = happy hacking, in my book.

