I love the anecdotal evidence of "brilliant developers" most of the technically illiterate posters here know.
Gotcha.
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.
Still waiting for you to point out these links you said you posted here for us to see.
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.
And what has Gruber said about Swift? Did he also say it sucked?
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.
I'm equally sure that Apple's engineers considered that and rejected it - ultimately only Apple know for sure. It's clear that Swift has been influenced by multiple programming languages, just as C#, Objective-C, python, java and on and on have too.
"If I see far it is because I stand on the shoulders of giants"
The language isn't a problem in any case. The implementation is.
The non-beta release hasn't even been out for 5 months. They have to go through the phase of letting people use it in their varied projects. They'll get crash reports for tools and fix them. There have been performance problems noted in some areas e.g:
For apps that are relying on heavy optimization and complex code then they should probably hold off with production code but the problems have to be fixed so they are part of that process. For every app that is huge and complex, there are hundreds if not thousands of apps that are basically web pages wrapped into an app. Those basic apps will benefit hugely from not having to deal with memory management and all the complexity of a C language.
Perhaps they should have kept it in beta but that might have put developers with more complex code off even trying it out and they need that feedback from them at some point. What else can you expect them to do? They're not going to abandon it, they've decided it's the successor to C and Objective-C for them. They're also not going to publicly point out all of the problems with their product, especially if the problems only affect a tiny portion of app developers. These issues always get resolved privately with any company.
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
That may be a major issue for you, but I feel sure the fact that you can't use Swift to develop Android apps is of absolutely no concern to Apple!
The "strangling hands of Apple" is very melodramatic and Objective-C is not an Apple only language, though the majority of developers using it are writing for Apple kit - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objective-C
I'm equally sure that Apple's engineers considered that and rejected it - ultimately only Apple know for sure. It's clear that Swift has been influenced by multiple programming languages, just as C#, Objective-C, python, java and on and on have too.
"If I see far it is because I stand on the shoulders of giants"
[sarcasm]Yes, Apple never makes any mistakes, and has never made any[/sarcasm]. Apple does consumer hardware and software better than most other companies most of the time, it doesn't mean they don't occasionally screw up. Or are you one of those people that would blame others for legitimate Apple mistakes? (ex the Cube).
It has been a long underlined point by Apple that exceptions are to be avoided at all costs in Objective-C and Cocoa. Exceptions simply marked an unrecoverable state, a last chance effort to grab information before the app was killed. There are inherit (no pun intended) issues surrounding memory and inheritance and exceptions. The NSError pattern has always been the preferred way to handle these situations. A lot of Java and C++ developers glossed over this.
NSException wasn't added until later in Cocoa's Foundation after Apple adopted it. It became a religious war between devs, so this time around, Apple just did away with exceptions entirely.
Wrong. NSException has been part of the Openstep Frameworks since Openstep 4.0.
I'm equally sure that Apple's engineers considered that and rejected it - ultimately only Apple know for sure. It's clear that Swift has been influenced by multiple programming languages, just as C#, Objective-C, python, java and on and on have too.
"If I see far it is because I stand on the shoulders of giants"
[sarcasm]Yes, Apple never makes any mistakes, and has never made any[/sarcasm]. Apple does consumer hardware and software better than most other companies most of the time, it doesn't mean they don't occasionally screw up. Or are you one of those people that would blame others for legitimate Apple mistakes? (ex the Cube).
You are being childish. I did not say, or even imply that Apple doesn't make mistakes - of course they do, just the same as every other company in the world that writes software.
What I'm saying, is that if you think that Apple spent over four years designing and creating a new programming language, taking advice from many of the world's finest language and compiler designers and being informed by the styles, intention and syntax of many other programming languages but somehow it never occurred to them that omitting the 'let' keyword could imply that 'let' was intended then I think you are very naive.
Reading the Swift manual it's clear that Apple decided that explicit declarations are what they want:
Quote:
Swift also makes extensive use of variables whose values cannot be changed. These are known as constants, and are much more powerful than constants in C. Constants are used throughout Swift to make code safer and clearer in intent when you work with values that do not need to change. (My emphasis)
and also:
Quote:
If a stored value in your code is not going to change, always declare it as a constant with the let keyword. Use variables only for storing values that need to be able to change.
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.
Perhaps a list somewhere of said haters should be made available for checking against before replying by genuine Apple fans reading here. The best way to deal with them is to ignore them but many being clever don't always show themselves so obviously.
<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_2672745" data-huddler-embed-placeholder="false"><span>Quote:</span><div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>KiltedGreen</strong> <a href="/t/184696/apples-new-swift-programming-language-takes-flight-with-getty-images-american-airlines-linkedin-and-duolingo/40#post_2672745"><img src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" class="inlineimg" alt="View Post"/></a><br/><br/><p> </p><p>I'm equally sure that Apple's engineers considered that and rejected it - ultimately only Apple know for sure. It's clear that Swift has been influenced by multiple programming languages, just as C#, Objective-C, python, java and on and on have too.</p><p> </p><p>"If I see far it is because I stand on the shoulders of giants"</p></div></div><p> </p>
[sarcasm]Yes, Apple never makes any mistakes, and has never made any[/sarcasm]. Apple does consumer hardware and software better than most other companies most of the time, it doesn't mean they don't occasionally screw up. Or are you one of those people that would blame others for legitimate Apple mistakes? (ex the Cube).
I don't know why exactly but you intrigued me. I just spent a fascinating half hour or more reading all your posts from day one. My, what a journey! The entirety should be published and called 'A journey from the dark side". Your early posts show an amazing excitement about getting your first Mac, as an ex Apple retailer it was a great read. Just for the record. No way is this guy an Apple hater. Uber geek maybe ...
You totally won me over with this post and I say that in a nice way. I never named my Macs but my cars yes.
I'm interested in hearing what you people have set your computer names to. Hopefully, you all know how to change it from "{First Name} {Last Name}'s Computer"
Being a Star Wars geek, I called my MacMini Revan (KOTOR I). My old PC is named Maul and my Linux server is called Sidious.
You are being childish. I did not say, or even imply that Apple doesn't make mistakes - of course they do, just the same as every other company in the world that writes software.
What I'm saying, is that if you think that Apple spent over four years designing and creating a new programming language, taking advice from many of the world's finest language and compiler designers and being informed by the styles, intention and syntax of many other programming languages but somehow it never occurred to them that omitting the 'let' keyword could imply that 'let' was intended then I think you are very naive.
Reading the Swift manual it's clear that Apple decided that explicit declarations are what they want:
and also:
Your childish comment was uncalled for. Perhaps I misinterpreted your assertion as implying an imaginary Apple infallibility, but a misinterpretation of a comment and an attempt at some petty squabbling are two vastly different things.
I'm simply pointing out a possibility that you seem to steadfastly deny that Apple made one or more mistaking designing their newfangled language. My seeming misinterpretation of as supposed belief in Apple's infallibility comes from your rather vigorous defence of this one design decision, which, at the end of the day, isn't hugely relevant.
I couldn't agree more. Just speaking personally, DED's editorials are what makes me keep reading AI more than anything else on AI.
Agree. There are two writers above anyone else: Daniel Eran Dilger ("technical" stuff) and Horace Dediu of Asymco ("business" stuff). Both of them base their writings on carefull factual data collection and analysis which is very rare nowadays (contrary to opinionated click bating/egomaniac blogging).
There are two types of wars that continue forever: religious wars and programming language wars. Both of them are subjective. On natural languages I personally prefer my mother tongue and various accents/dialects of British English and French - and you certainly disagree, to which your are entitled. On programming languages I prefer Ada - and you certainly disagree, to which your are entitled.
Gotcha.
Still waiting for you to point out these links you said you posted here for us to see.
And what has Gruber said about Swift? Did he also say it sucked?
Gruber has a blog.
Firstly I said that most complaints were behind the apple Dev firewall. However I did suggest a Google of two phrases. Too difficult?
The implementation of swift as it now stands is not fit for purpose. I'm not engaging in any language wars either as its the implementation not the language which isn't ready for large projects.
Agree. There are two writers above anyone else: Daniel Eran Dilger ("technical" stuff) and Horace Dediu of Asymco ("business" stuff). Both of them base their writings on carefull factual data collection and analysis which is very rare nowadays (contrary to opinionated click bating/egomaniac blogging).
I'm not a developer and not having programmed anything in decades, my question would be whether Swift is robust enough to become the foundation/primary language for Apple developers. I would also ask if it might be future proof through another decade or more of rapidly evolving hardware.
Surprising to see FORTRAN still so high on the list. That was the language that sent me screaming away from the idea that I could ever understand anything about programming.
Surprising to see FORTRAN still so high on the list. That was the language that sent me screaming away from the idea that I could ever understand anything about programming.
2) Love Duolingo so I'm glad to learn about this new app. If you think Rosetta Stone is a great training method then step out of the 1990s with the far superior and completely free Duolingo.
How do they make money? Are they just hoping to be acquired by Rosetta? I checked it out and their web interface is pretty cool HTML5
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.
Well, if the compiler were open-source, developers who are irritated by something in Swift could take a stab at fixing the many issues it has. Then, the language could become non-infuriating to use.
2) Love Duolingo so I'm glad to learn about this new app. If you think Rosetta Stone is a great training method then step out of the 1990s with the far superior and completely free Duolingo.
Unfortunately, they don't have Chinese (or any other Asian language) - just European ones.
Comments
Gotcha.
Still waiting for you to point out these links you said you posted here for us to see.
And what has Gruber said about Swift? Did he also say it sucked?
Gruber has a blog.
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.
I'm equally sure that Apple's engineers considered that and rejected it - ultimately only Apple know for sure. It's clear that Swift has been influenced by multiple programming languages, just as C#, Objective-C, python, java and on and on have too.
"If I see far it is because I stand on the shoulders of giants"
The non-beta release hasn't even been out for 5 months. They have to go through the phase of letting people use it in their varied projects. They'll get crash reports for tools and fix them. There have been performance problems noted in some areas e.g:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/24162475/is-swift-really-slow-at-dealing-with-numbers
but there are ways around some of the problems:
For apps that are relying on heavy optimization and complex code then they should probably hold off with production code but the problems have to be fixed so they are part of that process. For every app that is huge and complex, there are hundreds if not thousands of apps that are basically web pages wrapped into an app. Those basic apps will benefit hugely from not having to deal with memory management and all the complexity of a C language.
Perhaps they should have kept it in beta but that might have put developers with more complex code off even trying it out and they need that feedback from them at some point. What else can you expect them to do? They're not going to abandon it, they've decided it's the successor to C and Objective-C for them. They're also not going to publicly point out all of the problems with their product, especially if the problems only affect a tiny portion of app developers. These issues always get resolved privately with any company.
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
That may be a major issue for you, but I feel sure the fact that you can't use Swift to develop Android apps is of absolutely no concern to Apple!
The "strangling hands of Apple" is very melodramatic and Objective-C is not an Apple only language, though the majority of developers using it are writing for Apple kit - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objective-C
I'm equally sure that Apple's engineers considered that and rejected it - ultimately only Apple know for sure. It's clear that Swift has been influenced by multiple programming languages, just as C#, Objective-C, python, java and on and on have too.
"If I see far it is because I stand on the shoulders of giants"
[sarcasm]Yes, Apple never makes any mistakes, and has never made any[/sarcasm]. Apple does consumer hardware and software better than most other companies most of the time, it doesn't mean they don't occasionally screw up. Or are you one of those people that would blame others for legitimate Apple mistakes? (ex the Cube).Wrong. NSException has been part of the Openstep Frameworks since Openstep 4.0.
http://support.apple.com/kb/TA45874?viewlocale=en_US
I'm equally sure that Apple's engineers considered that and rejected it - ultimately only Apple know for sure. It's clear that Swift has been influenced by multiple programming languages, just as C#, Objective-C, python, java and on and on have too.
"If I see far it is because I stand on the shoulders of giants"
[sarcasm]Yes, Apple never makes any mistakes, and has never made any[/sarcasm]. Apple does consumer hardware and software better than most other companies most of the time, it doesn't mean they don't occasionally screw up. Or are you one of those people that would blame others for legitimate Apple mistakes? (ex the Cube).
You are being childish. I did not say, or even imply that Apple doesn't make mistakes - of course they do, just the same as every other company in the world that writes software.
What I'm saying, is that if you think that Apple spent over four years designing and creating a new programming language, taking advice from many of the world's finest language and compiler designers and being informed by the styles, intention and syntax of many other programming languages but somehow it never occurred to them that omitting the 'let' keyword could imply that 'let' was intended then I think you are very naive.
Reading the Swift manual it's clear that Apple decided that explicit declarations are what they want:
and also:
Perhaps a list somewhere of said haters should be made available for checking against before replying by genuine Apple fans reading here. The best way to deal with them is to ignore them but many being clever don't always show themselves so obviously.
I don't know why exactly but you intrigued me. I just spent a fascinating half hour or more reading all your posts from day one. My, what a journey! The entirety should be published and called 'A journey from the dark side".
You totally won me over with this post and I say that in a nice way. I never named my Macs but my cars yes.
Being a Star Wars geek, I called my MacMini Revan (KOTOR I). My old PC is named Maul and my Linux server is called Sidious.
Anybody else have a cool computer name?
Your childish comment was uncalled for. Perhaps I misinterpreted your assertion as implying an imaginary Apple infallibility, but a misinterpretation of a comment and an attempt at some petty squabbling are two vastly different things.
I'm simply pointing out a possibility that you seem to steadfastly deny that Apple made one or more mistaking designing their newfangled language. My seeming misinterpretation of as supposed belief in Apple's infallibility comes from your rather vigorous defence of this one design decision, which, at the end of the day, isn't hugely relevant.
I couldn't agree more. Just speaking personally, DED's editorials are what makes me keep reading AI more than anything else on AI.
Agree. There are two writers above anyone else: Daniel Eran Dilger ("technical" stuff) and Horace Dediu of Asymco ("business" stuff). Both of them base their writings on carefull factual data collection and analysis which is very rare nowadays (contrary to opinionated click bating/egomaniac blogging).
There are two types of wars that continue forever: religious wars and programming language wars. Both of them are subjective. On natural languages I personally prefer my mother tongue and various accents/dialects of British English and French - and you certainly disagree, to which your are entitled. On programming languages I prefer Ada - and you certainly disagree, to which your are entitled.
Firstly I said that most complaints were behind the apple Dev firewall. However I did suggest a Google of two phrases. Too difficult?
The implementation of swift as it now stands is not fit for purpose. I'm not engaging in any language wars either as its the implementation not the language which isn't ready for large projects.
Technical stuff? lol
Asymco is good though.
I'm not a developer and not having programmed anything in decades, my question would be whether Swift is robust enough to become the foundation/primary language for Apple developers. I would also ask if it might be future proof through another decade or more of rapidly evolving hardware.
Surprising to see FORTRAN still so high on the list. That was the language that sent me screaming away from the idea that I could ever understand anything about programming.
Surprising to see FORTRAN still so high on the list. That was the language that sent me screaming away from the idea that I could ever understand anything about programming.
Yeah that and the SCO guys who just won't retire
2) Love Duolingo so I'm glad to learn about this new app. If you think Rosetta Stone is a great training method then step out of the 1990s with the far superior and completely free Duolingo.
How do they make money? Are they just hoping to be acquired by Rosetta? I checked it out and their web interface is pretty cool HTML5
1) Great article.
2) Love Duolingo so I'm glad to learn about this new app. If you think Rosetta Stone is a great training method then step out of the 1990s with the far superior and completely free Duolingo.
Unfortunately, they don't have Chinese (or any other Asian language) - just European ones.