> Le 7 déc. 2017 à 13:59, Benjamin G <benjamin.garrig...@gmail.com> a écrit : > > > > On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 1:45 PM, Gwendal Roué <gwendal.r...@gmail.com > <mailto:gwendal.r...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >> Le 7 déc. 2017 à 11:00, Benjamin G via swift-evolution >> <swift-evolution@swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org>> a écrit : >> >> Until, and if, the “resistance” presents some conceptual explanation of how >> this could cause harm (I’m not asking for anything concrete, just a logical >> series of events that causes a plausible problem in practice), my belief is >> that the Swift community will see this as unwarranted fear. >> >> On the server side : >> automatically generate an administration api for your model based on >> introspection. Since swift doesn't provide anything convenient, and people >> may simply try to "port" approach from python framework (like django), >> they'll resort on recreating some kind of BaseDynamicObject that you'll have >> to extend for all your base classe, using some "properties()" and >> "methods()" functions to define your properties and methods for your model. >> >> Or : >> Automatically generate a database schema based on your model. Same idea. > > The explicit harm that Chris is looking for is yet to be shown. > > The harm isn't in generating the database schema, or the administration api. > it's in abandonning all kind of compile-time safety in your model layer (and > such by extension in almost every part of your stack) in order to accomplish > this. Dynamic language obviously don't have this concern, but thankfully > Swift isn't a dynamic language.
Yes, yes, but this has been said dozens of time already in this thread. Chris's question is *how*, not *what*. It's much harder to answer, I agree. >> You should not assume that everybody feels an horror thrill by reading such >> applications of dynamism. As a matter of fact, users of dynamic languages >> *live* and *enjoy* this. Python and Ruby users, obviously (Rails + Django), >> but also ours close cousins, the Objective-C developers, who rely on >> Key-Value coding or validation methods. Those use cases are, I'm sorry to >> say it, *compelling* use cases for dynamism. > > > Not sure what field you're working in, but at least on the server the general > trend toward more compile-time safety has been pretty obvious for some time > now. I'm not sure you really care about my answer. Gwendal
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
