News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Fucking Approachable Swift Concurrency. Parent comment

Re:Fucking Approachable Swift Concurrency by hn-acct on Tuesday December 30, 2025 @10:50AM (#46434517)
Do people actually believe that there are too many keywords? I’ve never met a dev irl that says this but I see it regurgitated on every post about Swift. Most of the new keywords are for library writers and not iOS devs.

Preventing deadlock wasn’t a goal of concurrency. Like all options - there are trade offs. You can still used gcd.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Fucking Approachable Swift Concurrency by isodev on Tuesday December 30, 2025 @11:07AM (#46434711)
> Do people actually believe that there are too many keywords?

Yes they do. Just imagine seeing the following in a single file/function: Sendable, @unchecked Sendable, @Sendable, sending, and nonsending, @conccurent, async, @escaping, weak, Task, MainActor.

For comparison, Rust has 59 keywords in total. Swift has 203 (?!), Elixir has 15, Go has 25, Python has 38.

> You can still used gcd.

Not if you want to use anything of concurrency, because they're not made to work together.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Fucking Approachable Swift Concurrency by dagmx on Tuesday December 30, 2025 @12:01PM (#46435304)
Most of your listed examples aren’t keywords though. They’re built in types or macro decorators.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Fucking Approachable Swift Concurrency by saagarjha on Tuesday December 30, 2025 @11:23AM (#46434873)
Task and MainActor are types.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Fucking Approachable Swift Concurrency by isodev on Tuesday December 30, 2025 @11:39AM (#46435045)
So?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Fucking Approachable Swift Concurrency by jen20 on Tuesday December 30, 2025 @12:07PM (#46435385)
So... they aren't keywords.

Swift does indeed have a lot of keywords [1], but neither Task or MainActor are among them.

[1]: https://github.com/swiftlang/swift-syntax/blob/main/CodeGene...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Fucking Approachable Swift Concurrency by isodev on Tuesday December 30, 2025 @12:59PM (#46436022)
I never said they’re keywords. Y’all way too focused on defending Apple at all cost.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Fucking Approachable Swift Concurrency by saagarjha on Tuesday December 30, 2025 @08:57PM (#46440481)
Replying to someone talking about keywords with a list of something that's not keywords, then retreating to "you are an Apple bootlicker" when someone points that out, is not a good look.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Fucking Approachable Swift Concurrency by dagmx on Tuesday December 30, 2025 @12:22PM (#46435590)
If you’re including types, you’d hit the many hundreds if not thousands in most languages.

It dilutes any point you were trying to make if you don’t actually delineate between what’s a keyword and a type.

[ Parent | on HN ]