On March 24, 2017 at 10:21:17 PM, Jonathan Hull ([email protected]) wrote:

This is exactly the problem. Both for access controls and dispatch.


How would you respond to clattner's position piece on this?  He disputes this 
point directly:

Swift is another case of a hybrid model: its semantics provide predictability 
between obviously static (structs, enums, and global funcs) and obviously 
dynamic (classes, protocols, and closures) constructs.  A focus of Swift (like 
Java and Javascript) is to provide an apparently simple programming model.  
However, Swift also intentionally "cheats" in its global design by mixing in a 
few tricks to make the dynamic parts of the language optimizable by a static 
compiler in many common cases...
The upshot of this is that Swift isn’t squarely in either of the static or 
dynamic camps: it aims to provide a very predictable performance model (someone 
writing a bootloader or firmware can stick to using Swift structs and have a 
simple guarantee of no dynamic overhead or runtime dependence) while also 
providing an expressive and clean high level programming model - simplifying 
learning and the common case where programmers don’t care to count cycles.
Is it?  Can you point to an instance where a member of the core team said they 
are aiming for “plenty of overlap”?

See above

Honestly, most of your examples could just be split into multiple files.
Specific arguments were advanced in those examples that they cannot.  Can you 
refute them?

You are conflating effort by the swift design and implementation community with 
your personal effort around migration.
No, I am referencing a Swift@IBM developer who reported that 

the open-source version of Foundation still has a long way to go to get the 
level of quality of the existing Objective-C frameworks, and we already have 
enough work to do without having to go make a bunch of arbitrary changes and 
risk a bunch of regressions because someone doesn't like a keyword... Accepting 
this proposal would waste hundreds of person-hours of work...
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution

Reply via email to