Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“Swift will be open source later this year”

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 573 posts

Re: “Swift will be open source later this year”

#541

Post by sinnet11 »

VikingCoder wrote: post #424
parasubvert wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Web is winning." If you mean "everything but HTML-based web sites", that's accurate. If you mean the actual Web sites, I really don't see it. The Web is huge, so isn't exactly dying, but it certainly isn't winning. Native mobile is "winning", in terms of being usually a far superior UX, and by sheer numerical demand. Native still often (thankfully) uses architectural elements of the web (URIs and HTTP) and the UX of…

> Native mobile is "winning", in terms of being usually a far superior UX, and by sheer numerical demand. Yeah? I could type a URL to anything here, and you could view it. If instead hide my content behind an app, I can't deep link to it. The likelihood of you installing the app to see the content is way lower. You need space on your mobile device to install my app. Potentially a password entered to install it. It ne…

Lets say I'm searching for a house.

If I go to redfin.com on my phone vs the native redfin app, there is a distinct difference in UX. The native app by far surpasses the mobile app in terms of performance and usability.

Now this is one example but can be said for many sites whose functionality isn't just to display static content.

Re: “Swift will be open source later this year”

#542

Post by BuckRogers »

VikingCoder wrote: post #531
parasubvert wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am a huge proponent of the web architecture, I just think HTML is dying from the politicization of the standards process and resulting slow pace of innovation. "If instead hide my content behind an app, I can't deep link to it. " This is not true. I enter a URL into my iPhone's Safari, it deep links into the App associated with the domain. We just watched a WWDC keynote that showed plenty of deep linking between ap…

> This is also contrary to the data - people love apps, download and use apps like mad. I just think you and I are talking about way different things... If I look at the HN main page right now, I see these URLs: placebobutton.com talkpythontome.com dice.com aol.com tripwire.com qz.com aracrown.org phys.org spring.io 250bpm.com lornajane.net digitalocean.com phys.org csmonitor.com smartdatacollective.com golgi.io fort…

Right. The web was originally meant for, and is still intended for HTML document sharing. Thankfully, HN is a basic, sensible site that doesn't cause cancer of the eye. Let most web developers around it and it would be.

That said, as the parent suggested, when it comes to opening my Gmail via Safari or the app, like everything beyond a simple document- I'm going to pick the app everytime.

Re: “Swift will be open source later this year”

#543

Post by VikingCoder »

BuckRogers wrote: post #542
VikingCoder wrote: post #531

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is also contrary to the data - people love apps, download and use apps like mad. I just think you and I are talking about way different things... If I look at the HN main page right now, I see these URLs: placebobutton.com talkpythontome.com dice.com aol.com tripwire.com qz.com aracrown.org phys.org spring.io 250bpm.com lornajane.net digitalocean.com phys.org csmonitor.com smartdatacollective.com golgi.io fort…

Right. The web was originally meant for, and is still intended for HTML document sharing. Thankfully, HN is a basic, sensible site that doesn't cause cancer of the eye. Let most web developers around it and it would be. That said, as the parent suggested, when it comes to opening my Gmail via Safari or the app, like everything beyond a simple document- I'm going to pick the app everytime.

...except when I'm on desktop.

GMail via web, every time.

Re: “Swift will be open source later this year”

#544

Post by BuckRogers »

VikingCoder wrote: post #543
BuckRogers wrote: post #542

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. The web was originally meant for, and is still intended for HTML document sharing. Thankfully, HN is a basic, sensible site that doesn't cause cancer of the eye. Let most web developers around it and it would be. That said, as the parent suggested, when it comes to opening my Gmail via Safari or the app, like everything beyond a simple document- I'm going to pick the app everytime.

...except when I'm on desktop. GMail via web, every time.

That will change soon with Windows 10. If you're on Linux you have no choice. And if you personally had to maintain Gmail on the web, you couldn't do it yourself. Enormous time put into an application such as Gmail. So suggesting you'd build Gmail on the web vs an app is disingenuous to suggest. It's quite an edge case for many reasons.

Re: “Swift will be open source later this year”

#545

Post by goondabba »

AlwaysBCoding wrote: post #134
dmritard96 wrote: post #15

I will surely be downvoted for speaking so off the cuff, but I haven't really enjoyed swift so far. How has the general developer reception been to the language, not just with respect to obj-c, but also to java or any other turing complete language?

I think it's terrible. Parsing a JSON response into a Swift object takes a full-day to figure out when it's literally just JSON.parse(response) in any other language. You can't pass immutable structures (structs) into NSNotifications and I can't figure out why. It's confusing and poorly documented, and a complete chore to use. React Native is a godsend.

Have you tried SwiftyJSON ?

https://github.com/SwiftyJSON/SwiftyJSON

Re: “Swift will be open source later this year”

#546

Post by CrystalGamma »

foxhop wrote: post #332

http://youtu.be/Pm8P4oCIY3g this is a talk by Joyant's Bryan Cantrill where he make the case that announcing something is going to be open sourced in the future is bad and is an anti pattern.

Interestingly this was the first thing that came to my mind when reading the headline ... Great minds think alike, as they say :D

Re: “Swift will be open source later this year”

#547

Post by enneff »

ploxiln wrote: post #446
enneff wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps there is a lesson here.

yup. more hate (bad press / pressure), better behavior from huge companies

If you think that's what happened then you know nothing about how big companies operate.

Re: “Swift will be open source later this year”

#548

Post by aaggarwal »

ignorabilis wrote: post #520
aaggarwal wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, with the type of growth Swift has shown in the past, there is going to be a big demand for Swift developers now. Swift could possibly rule the mobile/web. I have already added it on my #TODO list :)

If you ask me, no chance to rule the web. JavaScript has been the standard for a very long time now. Because JS is not a flawless language dozens of js precompilers have been created till now, so the competition is pretty rough. Swift tries to be functional and provides you a way to use immutable data structures, but it is neither functional nor opinionated enough to force immutablity. With that said I personally don…

When I was referring to web, I mainly considered the web-backend on web-servers. JavaScript is the standard for frontend, no doubt.

Re: “Swift will be open source later this year”

#549

Post by jophde »

dschiptsov wrote: post #514
jophde wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very true. I am starting to not see the point of Go. It's about the same performance as the JVM languages and the JVM is just as easy to deploy. On the JVM you get to choose between Clojure, Scala, Ruby, Groovy, Kotlin, and more. JVM is just as easy to deploy as a Go binary too. Personally, I plan to stick with JVM languages plus Rust.

Here is how to see the point of Go: Open the rosettacode web site. Choice any algorithm you are familiar with. Place Go version and Java version. Compare the number of words and lines. Compare the Maven hell with how Go solves the same problems.

I bet my Clojure or Groovy version will be simpler. I agree Scala is super complex :). Maven does suck. Gradle wraps it and does not suck. Probably the best build tool I have ever seen.

Re: “Swift will be open source later this year”

#550

Post by jophde »

vorg wrote: post #538
jophde wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You shouldn't be getting down-voted. The idea of anyone rewriting the entire Android Framework in Go when you can use better languages like Kotlin, Scala, Groovy, Clojure is asinine. Go will compile to Android architectures so you could do shared code in Go between iOS and Android like a C++ lib. That makes sense.

> That would leave you with Kotlin/Groovy/Clojure/Scala for the view layer of your Android app if you choose not use Java > when you can use better languages like Kotlin, Scala, Groovy, Clojure is asinine You seem to be piggybacking an aspiring JVM language (Kotlin) on top of three other alternative ones that have already made it (Scala,Groovy,Clojure). Because that trick's already been done before with them (i.e. Gr…

Sorry about that. They all have tools that make them work on Android. Kotlin is reasonable option imo. It doesn't effect app startup and runtime size is so much smaller compared to the others. Clojure Android adds 3 seconds to startup time for example. I haven't used Scala so I am not sure how nice it is for Android.
Post reply on HN