Swift Has Reached 1.0 • Hacker News Board

Re: Swift Has Reached 1.0

#91

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Sep 10, 2014, 1:09 PM UTC

tomp wrote: post #60

pjmlp wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They didn't need Swift for real world examples. F#, Scala, OCaml, Haskell, Clojure already have uses at big financial corporations and bio-informatics. However, Swift is another great way for spreading the ML gospel to mainstream developers, specially if it slowly takes Objective-C's place in Apple's heart.

Does Clojure support pattern matching? AFAIK, the only thing that is "functional" about Clojure is its immutable data structures (and closures, but even JS has those).

[deleted]

Re: Swift Has Reached 1.0

#92

Post by easytiger » Wed, Sep 10, 2014, 1:15 PM UTC

PopsiclePete wrote: post #85

I can't believe Apple would release a brand-new language with zero baked-in support for concurrency. In this day and age? Looks like developers will have to resort to 2nd grade efforts like GCD. I just don't get it. There's no excuse for it. Port Go's channels and go-routines to it, or something else, but come on - it's 2014, not 1998?

Well they are the people who sold a phone with no support for background tasks. They can do as they please.

Re: Swift Has Reached 1.0

#93

Post by alayne » Wed, Sep 10, 2014, 1:18 PM UTC

PopsiclePete wrote: post #85

I can't believe Apple would release a brand-new language with zero baked-in support for concurrency. In this day and age? Looks like developers will have to resort to 2nd grade efforts like GCD. I just don't get it. There's no excuse for it. Port Go's channels and go-routines to it, or something else, but come on - it's 2014, not 1998?

Swift has GCD and NSOperationQueue which work well. Why marry yourself to that functionality if you can externalize it with the potential to change it in the future?

Why doesn't Go have generics and sum types?

Re: Swift Has Reached 1.0

#94

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Sep 10, 2014, 1:18 PM UTC

easytiger wrote: post #92

PopsiclePete wrote: post #85

I can't believe Apple would release a brand-new language with zero baked-in support for concurrency. In this day and age? Looks like developers will have to resort to 2nd grade efforts like GCD. I just don't get it. There's no excuse for it. Port Go's channels and go-routines to it, or something else, but come on - it's 2014, not 1998?

Well they are the people who sold a phone with no support for background tasks. They can do as they please.

[deleted]

Re: Swift Has Reached 1.0

#95

Post by threeseed » Wed, Sep 10, 2014, 1:23 PM UTC

72deluxe wrote: post #68

pjmlp wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What competition?!? Until either of them support their languages on their respective OSs there isn't any competition.

I think without the supporting runtime libraries also being open-source, there isn't any point in open-sourcing the language is there? I mean, look at GNUStep. Not widespread adoption.

Actually there is. One of the big selling points of Go is its ability to produce self contained binaries. Swift would share this but also be a language that is more full featured.

GNUStep failure is more to do with Objective-C being such an odd language for most people.

Re: Swift Has Reached 1.0

#96

Post by josteink » Wed, Sep 10, 2014, 1:28 PM UTC

CmonDev wrote: post #90

DAddYE wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, we damn need a bit of more competition within bigs, right now seems just between Google and Mozilla (for the type of language).

C# is in front of all three in mobile space (it compiles to native of course). C# is the only language that is both modern and spans all major mobile platforms. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xamarin

Sure. But Xamarin is hardly open-source, and what OP was looking for was a open-sourced tool-chain & stack for mobile development.

Re: Swift Has Reached 1.0

#97

Post by threeseed » Wed, Sep 10, 2014, 1:30 PM UTC

stefantalpalaru wrote: post #71

Why is a programming language without any open source implementation getting so much attention?

Is this a rhetorical question ?

iOS is the lead platform for mobile app development. It is also by far the most lucrative both in terms of sales and the quality of the users i.e. for non-sales revenue. Hence there are going to more than a few developers on here interested in it.

We see posts all the time for Go, Rust etc. Why would Swift be any different ?

Re: Swift Has Reached 1.0

#98

Post by threeseed » Wed, Sep 10, 2014, 1:34 PM UTC

PopsiclePete wrote: post #85

I can't believe Apple would release a brand-new language with zero baked-in support for concurrency. In this day and age? Looks like developers will have to resort to 2nd grade efforts like GCD. I just don't get it. There's no excuse for it. Port Go's channels and go-routines to it, or something else, but come on - it's 2014, not 1998?

If you think about it none of what you said really makes sense.

In what way is GCD not a concurrency mechanism ? And why would you port Go's channel/routine model when it is less flexible than the Actor model ? And even then what type of mobile applications require that level of concurrency ? I've built about 20 mobile apps and not once needed anything more than a few background tasks.

Re: Swift Has Reached 1.0

#99

Post by threeseed » Wed, Sep 10, 2014, 1:35 PM UTC

easytiger wrote: post #92

PopsiclePete wrote: post #85

I can't believe Apple would release a brand-new language with zero baked-in support for concurrency. In this day and age? Looks like developers will have to resort to 2nd grade efforts like GCD. I just don't get it. There's no excuse for it. Port Go's channels and go-routines to it, or something else, but come on - it's 2014, not 1998?

Well they are the people who sold a phone with no support for background tasks. They can do as they please.

iOS supports the most common background tasks.

Re: Swift Has Reached 1.0

#100

Post by kalleboo » Wed, Sep 10, 2014, 1:35 PM UTC

CmonDev wrote: post #56

DAddYE wrote: post #24

Hey guys, do you know if swift will be ever open-sourced? After the WWDC they said that was early to think about it while in beta. So, what's the status now?

Their live feed yesterday was only available on Safari. Isn't it obvious that they want their herd only inside of a barn?

It was streamed in the open HTTP Live Streaming protocol. It just so happens that the only web browser that implements it in Safari. Worked fine in VLC.

Is there any other way to do live streams embedded on a web page without a proprietary Flash plugin?