461–470 of 573 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Swift repos will pass Go within 12 months. I think most iOS developers were holding off on Swift. Heck, Xcode and Swift, etc only became usable earlier this year.
Most people aren't writing open source iOS apps.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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…
Why would I prefer to type a URL? I can just as easily get an URL for the app in ap store and have it right there. Having app stored on my device is an advantage, unless you like your web apps download in full even on crappy mobile connection. And you really want the content of your app indexed by external search engine? I like being able to control the permissions my app has. Or does your web app not ask for the per…
If the web and apps where in the same competition I'd say the Web can't lose, but I don't believe they compete. They serve different purposes with some overlaps (think Google Docs, the web site and the apps).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would I ever care about Go for Android when I can write apps in Kotlin? Kotlin is fully interoperable with Java. I don't have much experience with Swift but Kotlin is so nice. It has the best features from numerous languages such as Ruby. C#, etc. It's being made by Jetbrains who makes the the core of Android Studio so it will have support. Kotlin is also nearly as fast at runtime as Java with a tiny 200kb runtim…
> Why would I ever care about Go for Android when I can write apps in Kotlin Power consumption.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What language is that link written in? It looks like bash sort of but not really?
It's a Makefile[1]. They are quite simple really. They're defined like this: target: dependencies command The command is run by a shell (e.g. bash!) when the target is called to be run. For example... all: hello world echo "!" hello: echo "Hello" world: echo "World" Now if you run "make", you will see each command being run. By default, if you call "make" with no arguments, the "all" target will be run. You can also…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It feels much too pragmatic for my taste. Exactly the kind of thing to come out of Google, to solve their type of problem (scalability, deployment are much more important than the code itself). Personally I don't have googles problems (few of us do!) and I really like a good type system, with algebraic types/pattern matching/generics
> It feels much too pragmatic for my taste It doesn't feels pragmatic at all. It relies on users to do the compiler's job(type assertions) , because "You dont need that with Go"TM ...
Right now the annoyance I hit more often is the inability to map a []Foo on an attribute .Name (string) to get a []string. I do that in ruby all the time, and with Golang it really sucks to do a for loop to collect stuff appending to a new array.
people.map(&:name) => ["Joe", "John"]
a := make([]string, 0)
for _, p := range people {
a = append(a, p.Name)
}Earlier quoted context omitted.
Being part of Kronos doesn't mean they are forced to implement any of their standards. Sony is a good example. The only Khronos stuff they use is WebGL in the PS4 menu and that OpenGL ES 1.0 with Cg shaders for the PS3 that no one used. All studios targeting PS3 favoured LibCGM ( http://sandstormgames.ca/blog/tag/libgcm/ ). But hope is good I guess.
They are actually listed as Vulkan participants: https://www.khronos.org/vulkan No idea what they actually do, but if they'd add Vulkan support to PlayStation, it would be good for developers. Some Apple developers so far participated in SPIR-V / LLVM related discussions. And MS was notably absent in anything related. As I said, when they'll fix this lock-in mentality, I'll second the claim that they seriously change…
Yes, PS4 devs porting to PC would likely like Vulkan over OpenGL or DirectX but PS4 devs on PS4 not so much.
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
The success of UNIX is inseparable from C and vice versa. C made UNIX one of the first portable operating systems and, by virtue of being low-level, provided performance.
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?
Swift's popularity has undergone a meteoric rise for a young language according to TIOBE [ http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.... ] But that's not surprising given its ecosystem; as others have mentioned, language success has less to do about its theoretical benefits and more to do about what environments it allows the developer access to. Javascript is the case-in-point; I think few people w…
The overall combination of Swift and Objective-C in those numbers make me believe Apple's decision to make Swift open source is less about goodwill, and more about stopping the bleeding.
Nice to see that Chris (Lattner) got his way. I chatted with him last WWDC right after the main Swift technical session, and he expressed the desire to open source it, but had no idea if he could get it through the powers that be. Supporting the standard libraries on Linux is certainly a surprise, though.
Supporting Linux is a surprise, but I think it's a great move on their part. Think: How many iOS apps are frontends to a server API? And how many of those APIs are running on Linux servers? Swift on Linux means ~all the code for a client-server iOS app can be written in the same language.