I refuse to consider it until they change the name back :)

Having said that, though, this assumes that xyz is great - or was great already - before coding agents. The team around Nim is great, and nim is not inelegant, but you kind of need to want to like types, and I found that to be the biggest obstacle for entry (also for crystal, by the way; the "just ruby, but with types" is IMO an incorrect description - just simulating syntax does not mean you are having the same language. This is even more so not the case with elixir. Some people think ruby is solely or primarily ruby because of the syntax. This is wrong; it is the philosophy that is the main difference between e. g. ruby and crystal or ruby and elixir, not the syntax; syntax comes after the philosophy and the philosophy is very different, though admittedly in crystal it is closer to ruby's philosophy than elixir's philosophy is to ruby's philosophy). I kind of like having to not want to care about types at all. This is also why I think those who want to slap on types on ruby and python are wrong. They use their own biased mindset to project from this point on, how languages without types are useless. And you can not convince them otherwise - they have set up their brain to function only that way already, which is interesting (and explains why they are so desperately trying to add types to e. g. ruby and python, as an example).