My point isn’t about what Swift 4 could be, but a timeline for something new to 
be made. Swift 3 is almost here. Personally I think Foundation, while venerable 
for its time, is a poor fit for the new world of Swift. Anyway, I’ll let the 
others speak as they had valid arguments.

> On 9 May 2016, at 3:40 PM, Xiaodi Wu <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> I'm +1 for this proposal. It is, IMO, a sensible way to evolve the current 
> situation to provide for a nicer experience.
> 
> As far as I can tell, arguments against the proposal argue for the 
> elimination of Foundation and a totally new set of Swift-native facilities, 
> which unless I'm mistaken is not at all on the roadmap. I just cannot agree 
> that a superior alternative to this proposal is "wait for Swift 4." Why stop 
> there? I hear Swift 9 is going to be pretty great...
> On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 11:24 PM Patrick Smith via swift-evolution 
> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> But if the NS- prefix is removed now, then it will make it more painful to 
> have breaking changes down the road. I’d prefer to see breaking changes 
> happen and the introduction of new completely modern APIs. Even just 
> protocols that the NS- Foundation can implement.
> 
> Say for example, a FileReferenceProtocol and a URLProtocol, where NSURL could 
> conform to both, but a modern implementation could have two separate concrete 
> struct types. Maybe that’s not feasible.
> 
> It’s just a shame to say ‘goodbye Objective-C, hello Swift clean slate’, and 
> then bring Foundation along for the ride as a core part for writing new 
> modern applications.
> 
> It would be great in my mind to have a plan to transition to a modern 
> ‘Foundation 2.0’. Say made using Swift 4.0 and its possible concurrency 
> operators. I think that would be the time to drop the NS- prefixes.
> 
>> On 9 May 2016, at 3:09 AM, Michael Sheaver via swift-evolution 
>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> 
>> Foundation is indeed tightly coupled with the Apple ecosystem; however with 
>> the movement to open source, I think we are approaching a fork in the 
>> road regarding this discussion. Like David articulated, Foundation either 
>> will need to her decoupled from its Apple historical roots or a parallel 
>> non-Apple Foundation will need to be developed. We all know how difficult 
>> and painful it is to maintain two different code sets that do mostly the 
>> same thing. My humble recommendation is that we start looking at decoupling 
>> foundation from its roots and a good first step would be to remove the NS- 
>> prefix. This change would do many positive things, including alerting 
>> developers that change is coming.
>> 
>> A long-term concern that I have is that if you do not begin the enormous 
>> task of at least beginning to remove Apple-centric dependencies, then 
>> sometime down the road someone outside the Apple environment will fork Swift 
>> and take it in ways out of our control.
>> 
>> In short, I am in favor of at least beginning the move toward removing NS- 
>> from Foundation.
>> 
>>> On May 8, 2016, at 11:16 AM, Josh Parmenter via swift-evolution 
>>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> David has articulated what I couldn't quite put my finger on, and I agree.
>>> This also comes around to something I probably missed elsewhere in the 
>>> discussion- but is the proposal to make NS classes just look like thus 
>>> don't have NS in Swift? Or is it to write Swift versions of those classes 
>>> that duplicate the functionality of those classes in Swift (for instance, 
>>> giving String the full interface of NSString without actually having it 
>>> call into NSString obj-c code?).
>>> I tried glancing through the discussion and couldn't really find an answer 
>>> to this (though I did it quickly, so my apologies if this is an obvious 
>>> question that has already been answered).
>>> Best
>>> Josh
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
>>> On May 8, 2016, at 00:41, David Waite via swift-evolution 
>>> <[email protected] 
>>> <mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected] 
>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> It's not a goal to rewrite Foundation from scratch in Swift. All Swift apps 
>>> that are running out there today are in fact using a combination of Swift, 
>>> Objective-C, C, C++, various flavors of assembly, and more. The goal is to 
>>> present the existing API of Foundation in a way that fits in with the 
>>> language today while allowing us to iteratively improve it over time.
>>> 
>>> Perhaps my concern is a higher level - I don't understand where Foundation 
>>> is envisioned going.
>>> 
>>> From my perspective, Foundation is highly coupled to Apple platforms and 
>>> Objective-C on one side, and part of the Swift standard library on the 
>>> other. Perhaps long-term Foundation should be split into two new things - a 
>>> core library for cross-platform swift development, and the infrastructure 
>>> for Objective-C interoperability on apple platforms only.
>>> 
>>> -DW
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> swift-evolution mailing list
>>> [email protected] 
>>> <mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected] 
>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>
>>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution 
>>> <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> swift-evolution mailing list
>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution 
>>> <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution>
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> swift-evolution mailing list
>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution 
>> <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution 
> <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution>

_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution

Reply via email to