oldguysrule
Giant step backwards. Vtables? I don't think so.
override keywords? WTF? Its not so much they removed the C as the "Object".
This is an advanced but powerful feature and is in fact exactly what Dr Alan Kay meant when he coined the term "Object Oriented". Any system that has abstract data types that does not have a default message handling capability is not actually "Object Oriented" and the "type safety" brigade strikes me as a bit like depression era prohibitionists. They can't handle it so nobody should have it.
The "type safety" thing is a myth. I have worked on colossally sized systems written in PERL/Mason, PHP, Ruby, Smalltalk, Java, and C++. You'll note that all but the last two are "type unsafe" by your definition and yet I think my last "type related" error was sometime around 2003.
Also, not all collections are meant to be homogeneous.
>ObjC also inherited several security issues of the C language, like unchecked arrays
Objective C developers use NSArray and NSString. Raw arrays and pointers to raw memory are beyond exceptionally rare in Objective C. This is just more prohibitionist propaganda. In the cases where there really are raw memory accesses - you need them - but for the most part Objective C provided safe alternatives and were used heavily (NSData for instance rather than raw arrays and NSString instead of arrays of char).
Nobody is going to do audio or video processing in Swift. The CoreAudio team used C/C++ because when you need performance, you need performance and bounds checking is inefficient.
I heard this sermon from the C++ people in 1992, and then the Java people in 1998 - there's nothing new here and the myth of "type safety" vs "type unsafe" still isn't really true. It is just a lot of baggage and lost capability we are being sold here.
Raw C is potentially unsafe. Objective C - not so much. You can write quite a lot without even using a pointer (apart from id - a safe dynamically typed pointer).
You can write shit code in any language - even Swift.
>how about goto fail?
I haven’t seen a goto in 20+ years. Strawman much?
>C is like saying "forget seat belts, child seats, anti-lock breaks, and adaptive steering! How can I power-slide? I want full control; I need to pump the breaks. People should just drive better, then we'd have fewer accidents”.
Yeah, and I suppose you’d prefer lumberjacks use rubber axes so they wouldn’t hurt themselves - or the trees for that matter. Life is dangerous. Get over it.
>At some point we have to admit C is no longer acceptable.
You bubble wrap your kids and lobby for lower jungle gyms at your kids schools too?
Swift doesn’t solve these problems and you sound like a self righteous ninny.
But hey - thats why there are scripting languages - for people who can’t deal with the machine. Pick one and go for it - but your scripting language isn’t suitably performant for things like audio processing (CoreAudio is in C/C++), real time control with tight tolerances, etc.
Grow the fuck up.
Sometimes you have to get your hands dirty and think hard and make stuff work. Your Swift code isn’t actually “safer” in the same way that the TSA hasn’t made flying safer - it is all security theater.
2) UIApplication.sharedApplication.delegate vs UIApplication.sharedApplication().delegate - nope. It isn’t more concise. It appears to be a wee bit more verbose.
3) Some benchmarks on the web are saying otherwise. It adds extra bridging and ARC for numbers. I don’t see how it can be faster and even if it is - nobody cares about speed. If I need to beat it, I can drop to C, IMP cache, and kick Swifts sorry little ass.
4) Safer - like the TSA says flying without nail clipp ers is safer? It doesn’t solve any problems I actually have. I think my last type error was in 2005 - took about a minute and a half to find it. I routinely work in dynamically typed languages and avoid static typed languages like the plague they are. I’m not opposed to type annotations when they help, but these just look like cargo cultism - like a lot Swift’s silly “features”.
5) It has less features where it counts - basically a less capable object model, weaker meta model, and more budensome interaction with C code than Objective C and a number of useful Objective C features have been walled off. I have Objective C code that cannot be written in Swift.
6) Except for that kind of dynamic stuff like performSelector: afterDelay: withArguments: and that pesky NSInvocation that isn’t available.
There are better projects around than this pile of crap. I will not be porting anything. Quite a lot of code I have can’t be ported.
Java killed WebObjects. Lets not let Swift kill Cocoa.
Well that’s gonna make storing persistent values tricky.
Swift is shit. I suspect it will die in a couple years, like the misguided effort to get people to adopt the Java bridge or WebScript before that.
If you think Java is remotely comparable in power and expressiveness to Objective C, you should probably reconsider your line of work.
The rise in popularity of Java nearly drove me from the industry it is such a verbose half baked pile of garbage. I could fill your browser with things you can do in Objective C that you cannot do in Java at all and this incredible flexibility is why Apple is such an agile company with such limited head count.
I loved Smalltalk and I love Objective-C at a deep level. The Objective-C runtime is incredibly powerful and its method dispatch is astonishingly efficient considering what it does. It is not as fast as vtables, but it isn't as fragile either.
It might well interest you to know that WebObjects (I'm talking 1997 here) ran on HP-UX, SunOS, AIX, and one other popular Unix of the day that slips my mind and it too shipped with a lively scripting language called WebScript which was not so different from a minimal Swift today.
The thing is, once you dig into the Objective-C runtime and spend a bit of time trying to write an interpreter, you start to realize that the interpreter almost writes itself. Swift is far from the first language built atop the Objective-C runtime.
Consider FScript (http://www.fscript.org) has been around for well over a decade and does more or less the same thing except it gives you something closer to Smalltalk than Javascript and it includes some advanced matrix manipulation goodies as well.
The majority of the people squealing with glee over the introduction to Swift seem to be the sort of people I wouldn't care to work with. If a bit of syntax puts you off so much, lord help you when a truly new paradigm hits.
Swift looks to have some nice features, but it seems to be missing the low level access to the runtime that advanced developers can use like default message handlers (forwardInvocation:/doesNotUnderstand:/methodForSelector: kinds of stuff) and the ability to fiddle method dicts at runtime which can be very useful for intercepting strange errors and unexpected code paths.
So, yes, I do LOVE Objective-C. It is my second favorite language to work in after Smalltalk and to those claiming that Swift will help them move over from Android because it less verbose - lets remember Java is the most boilerplate per capability language I've seen since COBOL. I don't know what those people are talking about.