Actual real developers are not happy with swift as it is now implemented. . Get yourself a dev account and pop into the tools->language-swift section.
I think the most interesting thing about Swift is that, for once, Apple are listening to developers. This was a point that the presenters and engineers at WWDC last year made over and over again.
The development of Swift is way more open than anything I've seen from Apple in the past. Developers' comments are being taken on board and used to shape the future of Swift.
It's simple. The absence of a keyword should mean the variable is immutable. The presence of a keyword should mean the variable is mutable. For example, In Ceylon, a variable is immutable if there is no modifying keyword. So String text is immutable and variable String text is mutable. Thus, the developer must make a conscious decision to make a variable mutable.
"Absence of a keyword should mean the variable is immutable". The "should" in there is only your opinion and Apple disagree.
One of Apple's aims is to make Swift a safe language; in Ceylon omission implicitly equates to immutable but Apple want the developer to explicitly state his/her intention so omission in Swift causes a syntax error.
Beyond the hundreds of other improvements, new software/hardware features, and vast changes in the past couple years, Swift by itself is evidence that "Apple is sitting on their laurels after Jobs" couldn't be further from the truth, regardless of how desperately certain trolls here try to spam that line and shove it down people's throats on a daily basis.
Actual real developers are not happy with swift as it is now implemented. . Get yourself a dev account and pop into the tools->language-swift section.
And that proves what exactly?
If I made a list of all the complaints I've seen in the Objective-C forum at Apple over the years, then using your logic I should declare it as one of the worst languages ever created.
I think you're confusing "discussion" with being a whiney little bitch.
The only criticism which set his sheep off was that it was a puff piece. The whiny pettiness is from the DED-heads who no doubt cry themselves to sleep if Dear Leader is c-c-criticised.
If I made a list of all the complaints I've seen in the Objective-C forum at Apple over the years, then using your logic I should declare it as one of the worst languages ever created.
No you wouldn't. You are confusing some criticism with lots of criticism.
I suspect that using 'precondition' in Swift has something to do with the 'lack' of exceptions.
Using 'union' is very C like and should be an implementation detail (of the language) rather than a language feature (I think).
Huh? Are we talking about he same thing? A union type is a common supertype to two otherwise unrelated types. For example, a String | Integer. Having this feature at the language level allows for some very powerful features.
"Absence of a keyword should mean the variable is immutable". The "should" in there is only your opinion and Apple disagree.
One of Apple's aims is to make Swift a safe language; in Ceylon omission implicitly equates to immutable but Apple want the developer to explicitly state his/her intention so omission in Swift causes a syntax error.
Personally, I prefer Apple's approach but YMMV.
Maybe it didn't occur to Apple's engineers to do so. It looks like a lot of the inspiration for Swift came from Scala, including the variablename:Type syntax.
Either way, Java's final is by far the worst way to do this.
This nonsense about "anybody who doesn't follow DED would be better off following an android troll" is the kind of with us or against us rhetoric beloved of fanatics.
Actual real developers are not happy with swift as it is now implemented. . Get yourself a dev account and pop into the tools->language-swift section.
What a childish post. Why don't you link us to some website with actual, insightful Apple articles and discussion? I have yet to find one. Pretty much everything out there is written in the most superficial manner possible, without any shred of context or perspective, and done solely for clicks. You might not agree with DEDs ideology, but at least he provides context, backs up his statements, compares and contrasts, and holds players to account for their statements and products. Obviously he likes apple, but I have yet to see him lie to distort history.
Your second line is pretty mind-numbing. "Actual real developers are not happy with swift". Oh, really? So any developer who likes swift is a "fake" developer? It's lines like this that take away all credibility. There's a ridiculously massive # of iOS developers, each with their own needs and wants. No doubt a large number will bitch and whine with any change but to suggest that development of swift is overall a negative thing, provides no advantages, and is hated by all "real" developers, is intellectual dishonesty at its worst. I personally know a couple of brilliant devs who are in love with it. They know what it can and can't do, but they're insanely impressed with it so far.
No you wouldn't. You are confusing some criticism with lots of criticism.
I'm not confusing anything. You seem to be implying that because people at the Swift forums at Apple are complaining about issues that it proves the language is somehow faulty or "not ready for prime time".
Even your use of the term "actual real developers" is condescending. WTH hell does that even mean?
Swift is a brand-new language. I would expect nothing less than a lot of issues and criticism.
Swift is definitely a serious improvement to Objective C, which I don't like at all. Nevertheless it does not solve the major issue, having a single development environment + language for mobile development: for iOS and Android. All the apps I develop are targeted for both iOS and Android, and any tool that can reduce double work would be a huge cost improvement.
My fear is that Swift will not escape from the strangling hands of Apple and will become an Apple only language like Objective-C has been
Swift is definitely a serious improvement to Objective C, which I don't like at all. Nevertheless it does not solve the major issue, having a single development environment + language for mobile development: for iOS and Android. All the apps I develop are targeted for both iOS and Android, and any tool that can reduce double work would be a huge cost improvement.
My fear is that Swift will not escape from the strangling hands of Apple and will become an Apple only language like Objective-C has been
What's wrong with different companies having different programming languages? Java's ubiquity has not been without problems, and with ubiquity there is the danger of complacency. Red Hat has Ceylon, Typesafe has Scala, Microsoft has C# and F#, etc. Apple has specific requirements for Swift, first and foremost is integrating with the Objective-C runtime and the Cocao libraries. Just because I disagree with some of their language design choices doesn't mean I'm against them having their own language. Google will find that using the Java language for Android will cause them tons of problems that Apple simply won't have with Swift.
Swift is definitely a serious improvement to Objective C, which I don't like at all. Nevertheless it does not solve the major issue, having a single development environment + language for mobile development: for iOS and Android. All the apps I develop are targeted for both iOS and Android, and any tool that can reduce double work would be a huge cost improvement.
My fear is that Swift will not escape from the strangling hands of Apple and will become an Apple only language like Objective-C has been
"the strangling hands of Apple" .... Wow.
Let's see: they've developed a language and environment for the benefit of developers for iOS & soon-to-be Mac apps.
They're in business to make money.
They make money by selling hardware.
People buy their hardware because they like the apps they can run on them. (I'm ignoring the jailbreaker contingent)
So ... they should make Swift universal because ...? To satisfy the "opensource uber alles" crowd? I don't think so.
All the apps I develop are targeted for both iOS and Android, and any tool that can reduce double work would be a huge cost improvement.
If porting your app to Android is double the work, why do it? Why not spend that effort writing another app for iOS since the App Store is so much more lucrative anyway?
<div class="quote-container" data-huddler-embed="/t/184696/apples-new-swift-programming-language-takes-flight-with-getty-images-american-airlines-linkedin-and-duolingo/40#post_2672721" data-huddler-embed-placeholder="false">Quote:<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>cropr</strong> <a href="/t/184696/apples-new-swift-programming-language-takes-flight-with-getty-images-american-airlines-linkedin-and-duolingo/40#post_2672721"><img alt="View Post" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" /></a><br /> <p> All the apps I develop are targeted for both iOS and Android, and any tool that can reduce <strong>double work</strong> would be a huge cost improvement.</p></div></div><p>If porting your app to Android is double the work, why do it? Why not spend that effort writing another app for iOS since the App Store is so much more lucrative anyway?</p>
Some people actually make money from Android apps. :eek:
I get tired of reading such criticisms and put-downs of Daniel's writings. If you don't like what he writes, don't read it.
My take is folks like you call articles such as this one "puff pieces" because they stand in contrast to the mostly idiotic criticisms and hit pieces published by people at CNET and the like.
I say if you want to offer Daniel constructive criticism, contact him privately, instead of throwing things out for everyone to see.
Half the commenters on AI are closet Apple haters and pounce on any article with a positive slant toward the company. They’re just not as in-your-face as the haters on MacRumors which has long since been completely taken over by this ilk. The commenters that rail against Mr. Dilger are the same ones who will argue to the death the veracity and relevance of an Apple hit piece. An Apple hit piece is lauded as insightful journalism while Dilger’s work is merely fanboyism.
What a childish post. Why don't you link us to some website with actual, insightful Apple articles and discussion? I have yet to find one. Pretty much everything out there is written in the most superficial manner possible, without any shred of context or perspective, and done solely for clicks. You might not agree with DEDs ideology, but at least he provides context, backs up his statements, compares and contrasts, and holds players to account for their statements and products. Obviously he likes apple, but I have yet to see him lie to distort history.
Your second line is pretty mind-numbing. "Actual real developers are not happy with swift". Oh, really? So any developer who likes swift is a "fake" developer? It's lines like this that take away all credibility. There's a ridiculously massive # of iOS developers, each with their own needs and wants. No doubt a large number will bitch and whine with any change but to suggest that development of switch is overall a negative thing, provides no advantages, and is hated by all "real" developers, is intellectual dishonesty at its worst. I personally know a couple of brilliant devs who are in love with it. They know what it can and can't do, but they're insanely impressed with it so far.
I love the anecdotal evidence of "brilliant developers" most of the technically illiterate posters here know.
The language isn't a problem in any case. The impkemtation is. If you haven't seen technical pieces criticising swift it's because you haven't looked and probably wouldnt understand it.
Half the commenters on AI are closet Apple haters and pounce on any article with a positive slant toward the company. They’re just not as in-your-face as the haters on MacRumors which has long since been completely taken over by this ilk. The commenters that rail against Mr. Dilger are the same ones who will argue to the death the veracity and relevance of an Apple hit piece. An Apple hit piece is lauded as insightful journalism while Dilger’s work is merely fanboyism.
Or people like me - who have been here since 2003 - are fans of Apple and sometimes critical of it but not that often. I'd love if the DED heads pissed off. You are bringing nothing to the table. In fact you guys are an embarrssment, you are the reason why android supporters can point to apple as a religious like cult.
we'd be much better off if the sane apple bloggers like Gruber, guy english and others who know about what they post were above the line, and the intellectual midgets pissed off. DED has a blog.
Comments
Actual real developers are not happy with swift as it is now implemented. . Get yourself a dev account and pop into the tools->language-swift section.
I think the most interesting thing about Swift is that, for once, Apple are listening to developers. This was a point that the presenters and engineers at WWDC last year made over and over again.
The development of Swift is way more open than anything I've seen from Apple in the past. Developers' comments are being taken on board and used to shape the future of Swift.
It's simple. The absence of a keyword should mean the variable is immutable. The presence of a keyword should mean the variable is mutable. For example, In Ceylon, a variable is immutable if there is no modifying keyword. So String text is immutable and variable String text is mutable. Thus, the developer must make a conscious decision to make a variable mutable.
"Absence of a keyword should mean the variable is immutable". The "should" in there is only your opinion and Apple disagree.
One of Apple's aims is to make Swift a safe language; in Ceylon omission implicitly equates to immutable but Apple want the developer to explicitly state his/her intention so omission in Swift causes a syntax error.
Personally, I prefer Apple's approach but YMMV.
Beyond the hundreds of other improvements, new software/hardware features, and vast changes in the past couple years, Swift by itself is evidence that "Apple is sitting on their laurels after Jobs" couldn't be further from the truth, regardless of how desperately certain trolls here try to spam that line and shove it down people's throats on a daily basis.
Actual real developers are not happy with swift as it is now implemented. . Get yourself a dev account and pop into the tools->language-swift section.
And that proves what exactly?
If I made a list of all the complaints I've seen in the Objective-C forum at Apple over the years, then using your logic I should declare it as one of the worst languages ever created.
The only criticism which set his sheep off was that it was a puff piece. The whiny pettiness is from the DED-heads who no doubt cry themselves to sleep if Dear Leader is c-c-criticised.
No you wouldn't. You are confusing some criticism with lots of criticism.
Huh? Are we talking about he same thing? A union type is a common supertype to two otherwise unrelated types. For example, a String | Integer. Having this feature at the language level allows for some very powerful features.
Maybe it didn't occur to Apple's engineers to do so. It looks like a lot of the inspiration for Swift came from Scala, including the variablename:Type syntax.
Either way, Java's final is by far the worst way to do this.
Hello DED.
This nonsense about "anybody who doesn't follow DED would be better off following an android troll" is the kind of with us or against us rhetoric beloved of fanatics.
Actual real developers are not happy with swift as it is now implemented. . Get yourself a dev account and pop into the tools->language-swift section.
What a childish post. Why don't you link us to some website with actual, insightful Apple articles and discussion? I have yet to find one. Pretty much everything out there is written in the most superficial manner possible, without any shred of context or perspective, and done solely for clicks. You might not agree with DEDs ideology, but at least he provides context, backs up his statements, compares and contrasts, and holds players to account for their statements and products. Obviously he likes apple, but I have yet to see him lie to distort history.
Your second line is pretty mind-numbing. "Actual real developers are not happy with swift". Oh, really? So any developer who likes swift is a "fake" developer? It's lines like this that take away all credibility. There's a ridiculously massive # of iOS developers, each with their own needs and wants. No doubt a large number will bitch and whine with any change but to suggest that development of swift is overall a negative thing, provides no advantages, and is hated by all "real" developers, is intellectual dishonesty at its worst. I personally know a couple of brilliant devs who are in love with it. They know what it can and can't do, but they're insanely impressed with it so far.
No you wouldn't. You are confusing some criticism with lots of criticism.
I'm not confusing anything. You seem to be implying that because people at the Swift forums at Apple are complaining about issues that it proves the language is somehow faulty or "not ready for prime time".
Even your use of the term "actual real developers" is condescending. WTH hell does that even mean?
Swift is a brand-new language. I would expect nothing less than a lot of issues and criticism.
Swift is definitely a serious improvement to Objective C, which I don't like at all. Nevertheless it does not solve the major issue, having a single development environment + language for mobile development: for iOS and Android. All the apps I develop are targeted for both iOS and Android, and any tool that can reduce double work would be a huge cost improvement.
My fear is that Swift will not escape from the strangling hands of Apple and will become an Apple only language like Objective-C has been
What's wrong with different companies having different programming languages? Java's ubiquity has not been without problems, and with ubiquity there is the danger of complacency. Red Hat has Ceylon, Typesafe has Scala, Microsoft has C# and F#, etc. Apple has specific requirements for Swift, first and foremost is integrating with the Objective-C runtime and the Cocao libraries. Just because I disagree with some of their language design choices doesn't mean I'm against them having their own language. Google will find that using the Java language for Android will cause them tons of problems that Apple simply won't have with Swift.
Or should I say few months?
:???:
Swift is definitely a serious improvement to Objective C, which I don't like at all. Nevertheless it does not solve the major issue, having a single development environment + language for mobile development: for iOS and Android. All the apps I develop are targeted for both iOS and Android, and any tool that can reduce double work would be a huge cost improvement.
My fear is that Swift will not escape from the strangling hands of Apple and will become an Apple only language like Objective-C has been
"the strangling hands of Apple" .... Wow.
Let's see: they've developed a language and environment for the benefit of developers for iOS & soon-to-be Mac apps.
They're in business to make money.
They make money by selling hardware.
People buy their hardware because they like the apps they can run on them. (I'm ignoring the jailbreaker contingent)
So ... they should make Swift universal because ...? To satisfy the "opensource uber alles" crowd? I don't think so.
All the apps I develop are targeted for both iOS and Android, and any tool that can reduce double work would be a huge cost improvement.
If porting your app to Android is double the work, why do it? Why not spend that effort writing another app for iOS since the App Store is so much more lucrative anyway?
I get tired of reading such criticisms and put-downs of Daniel's writings. If you don't like what he writes, don't read it.
My take is folks like you call articles such as this one "puff pieces" because they stand in contrast to the mostly idiotic criticisms and hit pieces published by people at CNET and the like.
I say if you want to offer Daniel constructive criticism, contact him privately, instead of throwing things out for everyone to see.
Half the commenters on AI are closet Apple haters and pounce on any article with a positive slant toward the company. They’re just not as in-your-face as the haters on MacRumors which has long since been completely taken over by this ilk. The commenters that rail against Mr. Dilger are the same ones who will argue to the death the veracity and relevance of an Apple hit piece. An Apple hit piece is lauded as insightful journalism while Dilger’s work is merely fanboyism.
I love the anecdotal evidence of "brilliant developers" most of the technically illiterate posters here know.
The language isn't a problem in any case. The impkemtation is. If you haven't seen technical pieces criticising swift it's because you haven't looked and probably wouldnt understand it.
Or people like me - who have been here since 2003 - are fans of Apple and sometimes critical of it but not that often. I'd love if the DED heads pissed off. You are bringing nothing to the table. In fact you guys are an embarrssment, you are the reason why android supporters can point to apple as a religious like cult.
we'd be much better off if the sane apple bloggers like Gruber, guy english and others who know about what they post were above the line, and the intellectual midgets pissed off. DED has a blog.