Personally, I’d love this system (I immediately thought of some code snippets I’d bring!), but I’m curious how you’d handle candidates without any open source projects or contributions who still have a substantial employment history but are unable to show any code from that because it’s all proprietary.

My biggest (mostly) irrational internet pet peeve is the proliferation of people suggesting “:wq” when “:x” is strictly better.

Nim is one of my favorite languages, and has been one of my primary languages in rotation for projects for the last five or so years. I’ve written servers (and web frontends, CLI tools, quick scripts, etc.) with it and am very happy with the results.

It’s hard for me to put into words why I like it so much, but I think it might actually be because it’s such a mishmash of paradigms. If I’m in a functional mood, I can use lots of ideas from functional programming. If I feel like using OOP everywhere, I can do that too. And if I want to mix both together, it’s no problem! Nim kind of feels like the Wild West, and while that’s something I’d dislike in most languages, for whatever reason it works when writing in Nim.

This is interesting—I hadn’t heard of vis or Sam. Thanks for sharing!

I will say that I like to think of myself as a reasonably advanced Vim user, and the substitution commands used for the example wouldn’t have even occurred to me for changes 1 and 2. I would have automatically done it the alternative ways listed. I’m pretty sure those would be faster to type too (they’re fewer keystrokes). Is it really true for most people that “the substitute command is used 90% of the time when using commands”?