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

561–570 of 573 posts

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

#561

Post by Frenchiie »

aikah wrote: post #507
Frenchiie wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well Node.js(+Framework) is an entirely different beast from Swift(+Framework), RoR, Python+Django, etc. As for Swift(+Framework) vs Python+Django, RoR, etc, Swift would have to be faster and introduce some amazing new feature for it to replace anything. I dont personally like how Swift is statically typed but does type inference. If i dont specify a type for my variable i should be able to change my variable's value…

Stupidest argument i've ever heard in favor of javascript. > If i dont specify a type for my variable i should be able to change my variable's value to whatever type i want.

Not really.

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

#562

Post by pluma »

tomelders wrote: post #512
pluma wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But programmers don't want better languages[0]. Programmers mostly just want what they already have. You can't overcome that kind of resistance just by saying "look, here's a language that's more fun and modern". Programmers say they want better languages, but good luck trying to convince them to switch to a new language just by its merit. The only tangible benefit of Swift is that it can be used instead of Objective…

I'd counter this > But programmers don't want better languages With TypeScript and/or ES6(7)+Babel. These have a pretty healthy userbase between them and there's a lot of excitement around ES6 which leads me to think that developers do want better languages. Also... I want a better language. I'm not sure how you'll convince me otherwise and I don't think I'm alone in this sentiment. Do they want a "different" languag…

I agree, in part.

Programmers do want better languages, but they are extremely allergic to friction.

Parts of ES6/7 are relatively low friction thanks to Babel. But even so moving the majority of JS devs to modern JS is a very slow and long process.

Swift may make a dent if Swift-to-JS becomes a thing, but compile-to-JS languages are mostly a failed experiment (see the lack of success of "serious" languages like Dart or the decline of CoffeeScript). The advantage of Babel over other to-JS compilers is that you're just compiling JS to JS and it carries the promise that one day you won't need the compilation step at all.

The "JavaScript is the ASM of the Web" idea, while enticing, has time and again failed to come true. I don't think Swift can succeed where others have failed, even if it would allow iOS developers to write web apps.

At the risk of having to swallow my words, I don't think Swift-in-the-browser poses any risk to JS. I also don't think Swift-on-the-server will have a major impact, although I can imagine iOS-heavy shops wanting to use Swift when developing server APIs for their apps.

I agree that Apple will carry on regardless. Apple is all about controlling their ecosystems, so I wouldn't be surprised if they try to pose Swift as an alternative to JS (much like their unilateral CSS extensions back in the day).

About the video: basically Douglas Crockford (of JSON fame and JSLint infamy) argues that history has proven that developers (as a whole) favour similarity over "betterness" when it comes to the success of programming languages. They're more likely to pick something that is nearly exactly like what they already know than something that requires them to adjust their mental model, even if it is superior in nearly every way. The entire series is worth a watch IMO, and helps appreciating why and how JS got to the point where it is today.

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

#563

Post by pluma »

herval wrote: post #553
pluma wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But programmers don't want better languages[0]. Programmers mostly just want what they already have. You can't overcome that kind of resistance just by saying "look, here's a language that's more fun and modern". Programmers say they want better languages, but good luck trying to convince them to switch to a new language just by its merit. The only tangible benefit of Swift is that it can be used instead of Objective…

Following your logic, Javascript just started growing on the server-side due to a number of frontend devs "just wanting what they already have". There's a huge number of mobile devs out there that have to, one way or another, write server-side code. Guess what'd be their language of choice then (when the Apple-backed open-source Swift is out)?

There's vastly more people who write JavaScript than people who write iOS apps in Swift.

I agree that server-side Swift may become a thing for iOS developers writing their own server APIs, but I'm only inclined to believe that it will at best become yet another alternative alongside Node, Ruby, Python and PHP. After all, Swift will only be a logical choice if you're already using Swift as the primary language -- i.e. only if you're writing native iOS apps.

For the "Swift in the browser" narrative it's also important to remember that the web is not just JavaScript. Even if you can abstract away DOM manipulations as in React, you still have to be aware of HTML and CSS and how everything comes together. Replacing JS with Swift only provides another layer of indirection, you still have to be a web developer to write web apps.

Considering how previous attempts to pretend you're not actually writing JS worked out (Ruby developers using CoffeeScript, Java developers using Dart or GWT, Python developers using PyJS, etc) I don't think JS in the browser is going anywhere, no matter how much some people would wish it.

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

#564

Post by noobie »

thebouv wrote: post #191
noobie wrote: post #99

This means developers don't have to be on OSX to make iOS apps?

That is already true if you go with other languages/frameworks to develop on OSX.

Can you elaborate? I mean nothing beats information from an experienced person :)

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

#565

Post by parasubvert »

VikingCoder wrote: post #530
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…

> We just watched a WWDC keynote that showed plenty of deep linking between apps, from Siri, etc. True, apps are beginning to figure this out. But in general, I can easily share a link to any web page. Sharing a deep link into some content in some app is nowhere near a "solved problem." > This is also contrary to the data - people love apps, download and use apps like mad. Really? If I share a link to a CNN or HN art…

"Really? If I share a link to a CNN or HN article, you're less likely to view that? I don't think you're remotely correct. It depends on the kinds of content, I guess. I'm just saying there are cases where web wins huge."

I didn't say I would be less likely to view the link if t was a website, nor would most people avoid it. The web architecture (linking) is alive and well.

I'm saying that many websites have an app link at the top of their content once I click it and if I found myself visiting that site often i would click "Get" and grab it.

Then future links would not open my browser, they'd open the app.

"I'm sitting here typing to you on ycombinator.com. After spending time on reddit.com. facebook.com. plus.google.com. cnn.com."

Right - my habit for many years as well. But IME most people use app versions of those sites on a mobile device (except HN - and the UX suffers for it)

"Yup, there are apps versions of those, but I sit at my desk for 8-10 hours a day, and my desktop experience is WAY better than my mobile experience..."

Here we fundamentally disagree. The mobile experience FAR exceeds the desktop experience for most casual computing tasks. I use my phone and iPad way more than my laptop for reading and replying; I use my laptop more for coding and system administration.

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

#566

Post by parasubvert »

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…

for many of those, they're not apps they're websites. Apps are for repeat use of aomething more complicated than reading documents. Usually websites with a lot of JavaScript are better off as apps.

LinkedIn I have an app, and it's usually better than the website except for some features they maddeningly haven't carried over. Dice too. The rest I would use a website.

This isn't contradictory to my point that apps are the future of how we interact with the web. In effect apps are about a proliferation of user agents - rather than a single hugely popular type of user agent (the browser) and a handful of busy singular agents (the crawler). I am not saying the Web is going away, I'm saying HTML browsers are becoming relatively less important. They're not going away they're just not where the money and growth is.

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

#567

Post by kayamon »

pjmlp wrote: post #458
microtonal wrote: post #449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It feels much too pragmatic for my taste. C was unprincipled and pragmatic too, it was created with the goal of making UNIX portable. Still, C became one of the most popular and influential languages. While I prefer ADTs/generics too, let's not forget that many people are less principled and pragmatic factors influence language choice as much (toolchain, ecosystem, popularity, familiarity).

> Still, C became one of the most popular and influential languages. That was a side effect of successful startups (Sun, SGI...) adopting UNIX as their OS.

Having had exposure to both C and Pascal at around the sane time, I vastly preferred working in C.

I do think there's something intrinsically good about it compared to other contemporary systems languages - I don't think it's just that it tagged along with Unix.

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

#568

Post by Yuioup »

ignorabilis wrote: post #522
alkonaut wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's great news. Hopefully there will be a node-like ecosystem for writing small services on Linux soon. With F#, Swift and C# available, hopefully the proliferation of Javascript can be slowed on the server (without people running to Go).

With the .NET Framework actually declining, Swift still being far away from the server and frameworks like Meteor, JS seems to have a really good position. With that said I will root for Clojure + ClojureScript. One could theoretically build a framework much more advanced than Meteor, on the same code-sharing principles.

How so is .NET declining? I haven't heard this.

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

#569

Post by Ezhik »

kristopolous wrote: post #523
jedrek wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Hackintoshing has proven to be quite elusive I've been using a hackintosh since 2008. It's literally never been easier to get one up and running.

So many people report success but a half dozen attempts with 20 years of computing to back me up has been nothing but abysmal failure. I don't know what kind of magical book of voodoo spells these people are using. I wonder if the web is just biased towards success because generally the people who haven't succeeded have nothing to say. If so, it would be nice to get insight on the whole picture here somehow

If you have the right hardware it can work as good as a real Mac.

But some hardware is just not compatible and that's it, nothing you can do about it.

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

#570

Post by mcmahoniel »

kristopolous wrote: post #523
jedrek wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Hackintoshing has proven to be quite elusive I've been using a hackintosh since 2008. It's literally never been easier to get one up and running.

So many people report success but a half dozen attempts with 20 years of computing to back me up has been nothing but abysmal failure. I don't know what kind of magical book of voodoo spells these people are using. I wonder if the web is just biased towards success because generally the people who haven't succeeded have nothing to say. If so, it would be nice to get insight on the whole picture here somehow

It's not hard. Apple computers are still using commodity hardware - that is, you can buy very similar parts off the shelf to build your own system. The closer you get, the easier it is, but there are forums revolving around tweaks and updates to make just about anything work. Even AMD CPUs, which Apple has never used.

It _does_ take some tinkering, though, and if you aren't comfortable with that (or if your time is valuable enough), you should invest in the real deal. :)

Post reply on HN