> Le 11 juil. 2016 à 09:39, Tino Heth via swift-evolution > <swift-evolution@swift.org> a écrit : > > >> With the existence of Swift on the server, dynamically linked, independently >> distributed frameworks will not be an Apple-only issue - this extends beyond >> Apple's OS X-based platforms towards how dynamic frameworks link against >> each other as if they are to be distributed separately. >> >> It is short sighted to suggest that all Swift deployments will be under >> Apple's control. > I'm really looking forward for server-side Swift — I'm planning for years to > extend my portfolio in that direction, and Swift could really push that > diversification.
Server side swift is already alive: https://developer.ibm.com/swift/ > But I had a concrete reason for interest in writing my own backend-code: > Server-side was imho broken on large scale, and it still isn't fixed yet… I > can run circles around those poor Java-developers who have to fight crusted > structures and deal with sluggish tools like Maven and Tomcat (and Java ;-).* > It seems to me I'm not alone with my opinion, because there are already > alternatives on the rise: > Look at Docker — it's a huge success, because it not only takes application > and libraries to build a robust unit; it even includes a whole OS! > > On iOS, it already hurts when you have a bunch of Swift-Apps which all have > the stdlib bundled — but on the server, this doesn't matter, and I'm > convinced it would be a bad move to propagate shared frameworks. > > - Tino > > * of course, there are agile alternatives — but in my environment, most of > the big players wouldn't even consider something like Rails > > _______________________________________________ > swift-evolution mailing list > swift-evolution@swift.org > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
