I shared the project on slack, but I don’t think it was that long ago. Not
sure if somebody mentioned it earlier.

There was some reluctance about being still at alpha stage and the version
is still alpha.

I haven’t really tried it, but looks good.


El El sáb, 27 jun 2026 a las 9:35, Bryan Ellis <[email protected]> escribió:

> In the past, the `EvanBacon/xcode` project was mentioned as a possible
> alternative to the Xcode parser currently used in Cordova-iOS.
>
> At the time, the project was still in its early stages and lacked some of
> the functionality we needed, although it appeared to have a lot of
> potential.
>
> Now that a few years have passed, I thought it might be a good time to
> revisit the discussion and evaluate whether the package is now a viable
> option. Keep in mind that the package is still alpha and has not officially
> released its first major.
>
> According to the project, `EvanBacon/xcode` reports significantly improved
> performance, about 10–12x faster than the current parser and able to parse
> large project files (around 263 KB) in under 100 ms. It also noted that our
> current parser may struggle with large files.
>
> If the community feels that adopting an alternative parser is worth
> considering, it would also be helpful to discuss what that could mean for
> the current parser. The existing parser is used beyond Cordova and has
> significant weekly downloads on npm.
>
> * Has anyone recently evaluated or been using `EvanBacon/xcode`?
> * Does it provide the functionality and compatibility needed for
> Cordova-iOS?
> * Are there any known limitations?
> * If adopted in the future, what are your thoughts about the future of the
> current parser that is used in many other ecosystems?
> * If there were a formal vote to adopt an alternative parser and it passed,
> would anyone be interested in contributing those changes and those able to
> review?
>
> Also, from a plugin developer's point of view, I don't believe there would
> be any impact if a plugin continued to use the existing parser. However,
> that's my current understanding and if anyone sees something different I
> would like to hear about that too.
>
> This is intended as a discussion to gather feedback rather than a proposal
> to make a change. I'd appreciate hearing others' thoughts.
>

Reply via email to