[HN Gopher] Swift was not given the chance to prove itself as a ...
___________________________________________________________________
Swift was not given the chance to prove itself as a language
Author : troupo
Score : 7 points
Date : 2023-10-07 19:56 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (mastodon.social)
(TXT) w3m dump (mastodon.social)
| Someone wrote:
| > "Do the benefits you intend to add outweigh these downsides."
| Or does there exist _some other language_ that gets it close
| enough, plus has decades of work and stability going for it? The
| fact that Apple kept this thing to such a small number of people
| before announcing it leads me to believe they never even
| considered this sort of analysis.
|
| I don't see how that follows, and think it isn't true. They
| wanted [1]
|
| a) a modern safe approachable [2] language
|
| b) with excellent interoperability with their Objective-C code,
| so that it could gradually replace it.
|
| c) that's at least as time and space efficient as the
| Objective-C/C/C++ combo.
|
| d) that they have control over.
|
| d) alone implies they needed a new language, but even ignoring
| d), what were their options?
|
| The 'approachable' in a) (IMO) rules out languages like _rust_
| (which also didn't exist yet), b) implies they needed reference
| counting and strong typing, c) rules out anything interpreted or
| JVM-based.
|
| [1] https://www.swift.org/about doesn't mention most of these,
| but I don't think that makes it untrue.
|
| [2] I think they got that only partially. Swift looks like a
| simple language, but is not one (anymore)
| steeve wrote:
| All I'll say is: "Expression too complex to be evaluated in
| reasonable time"
|
| Those who know, know.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-10-07 23:02 UTC)