←back to thread

Apple is open sourcing Swift Build

(www.swift.org)
612 points dayanruben | 4 comments | 01 Feb 25 16:44 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
uhura ◴[01 Feb 25 19:07 UTC] No.42901158[source]▶
I believe that this long game of Swift being "good for everything" but "better for Apple platforms" will be detrimental to the language. This does not help the language nor seems to bring more people to the ecosystem.

Competitors seems to have a combination of: - Being more open-source - Have more contributors - Have a narrower scope

Maybe they should consider open sourcing all the tooling (like Xcode) otherwise the gap will only grow over time when compared to other languages.

replies(10): >>42901489 #>>42901515 #>>42901558 #>>42902281 #>>42902484 #>>42903459 #>>42903586 #>>42903797 #>>42905687 #>>42906498 #
kelnos ◴[01 Feb 25 21:02 UTC] No.42902281[source]▶
This feels similar to C# and Microsoft's other CLR/.NET languages. Sure, they've broken away a bit and aren't exclusively used to run things on MS platforms, but still.

And Swift is even more tied to Apple, at least to my inexperienced eye. I'm not really an Apple person (Linux, Android), even though I once really enjoyed their hardware... Swift is so far down on my list of languages to look at that I probably will never get to it.

replies(4): >>42902429 #>>42903167 #>>42905352 #>>42905806 #
codr7 ◴[01 Feb 25 21:15 UTC] No.42902429[source]▶
Sorry to hear that, I wouldn't bet anything on Apple but the core language contains a lot of good ideas imho.
replies(2): >>42902592 #>>42902660 #
nwienert ◴[01 Feb 25 21:42 UTC] No.42902660[source]▶
Seems lovely but headed in a Scala-like bloated direction. The "too complex" type issues were really bad last I tried.

And one of my biggest gripes is the way you can extend things from anywhere else, easy to cause a mess.

replies(2): >>42905167 #>>42905203 #
1. metaltyphoon ◴[02 Feb 25 02:42 UTC] No.42905167{4}[source]▶
Swift is getting out of hand after Chris left and Swift UI was introduced. The language has over 210 keywords… thats crazy
replies(1): >>42906953 #
2. saagarjha ◴[02 Feb 25 07:51 UTC] No.42906953[source]▶
Keywords are a bad way to judge a language.
replies(1): >>42913352 #
3. metaltyphoon ◴[03 Feb 25 00:20 UTC] No.42913352[source]▶
Not saying you are wrong but tell me why it would be a good idea to have hundreds of keywords for a programming language.
replies(1): >>42914188 #
4. saagarjha ◴[03 Feb 25 02:12 UTC] No.42914188{3}[source]▶
Because not having hundreds of keywords means that either you have some parts of the language that are "this has a special meaning please don't touch" (double underscores are good enough, right guys?) or "we reassigned 10 different things to the same keyword to keep the number low" (ahem, static).