Apple Details Swift 3.1 Ahead of Planned Spring 2017 Release

[PinkyMacGodess]

If your reaction to a programming language is that it cares to much about getting details right, programming is not for you.

Hah hah...

My point was about overly aggressive syntax. If you equate that to me being an idiot, than it's you that may be the lesser programmer.

Chances are I've been programming a lot longer than you have, and it's nice to have a language that isn't so 'perfect'. Well, and updated so damn much...
[doublepost=1481556767][/doublepost]

At this point I'll be very, very surprised if you have any inkling of what COBOL even looked like.

Granted, it has been twenty some years since I used it. The place I worked at used COBOL, Dyl-280, and SAS. I loved SAS... Best programming language they had available. For what it was...
[doublepost=1481557114][/doublepost]

Swift is still a very young language and therefore is going through iterations quickly. But major languages changes should be stopping soon.



And as with most other languages, once you've learned the language and understood the core concepts, there is really no reason to buy printed books or follow courses for every new version any longer. In Java deprecated features are being phased out quiet slowly (too slowly), so you have enough time to upgrade. And BTW, Java is not dead at all. It rightfully is dead in the browser but otherwise it is still very strong.

Okay, my huge bitch about printed books, and ebooks is that Apple charges retail price for all of the ebooks I've looked at, or damn near retail price. I have almost been willing to buy a droid tablet and use the Amazon reader apps just to save like over 50% off some books for not using an Apple device.

Apple was sued over that too, I thought. Why should I pay hard in-my-hand retail price for a collection of bits that costs nothing to provide to me. I'm not sheap (well, um) but I'm not stupid (or I like to think I'm not) so paying FULL RETAIL for an ebook is ridiculous.

How do books look in the Nook reader app, or any other app?

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

What do you Swift programmers do when the client wants the same app to also run on Android? Is there an easy path from Swift code to an Android executable app?

 

[crashoverride77]

Developer beware. The last time I used their migration tool, my project would not compile afterward. I was trying to show off a little proof of concept that I hadn't worked on in a while. I opened to project in Xcode and it refused to build and run without letting its migration utility run. I finally conceded. It introduce a number of eeeors and screwed it up that I basically just abandoned the code afterwards.

Sadly, since this was just a small little sketch, I didn't bother with source control before letting the utility destroy it. Pretty much all of the stuff I strarted writing in Swift, I think I have abandoned now.



That's a subjective claim. There are already others on this thread who've said the opposite.



The future of software development isn't this hot poop filled bag of a cranky language grafted onto 30-year-old frameworks. Looking at the landscape, if this is Apple's answer for how apps are going to be developed going into future, they lost. Game. Over.

If this isn't their answer, then there is little reason to actively adopt it now fast and today. To top it all off... My experience was that Obj-C works better with their existing frameworks than Swift does. It seemed to me I was actually gaining very little by adopting it.

Also, re: complexity? I thought Tim Cook told the world at WWDC '14 that Swift made app development so easy "you or I could do it."
[doublepost=1481556011][/doublepost]

I understood it as he wanted training books like Big Nerd Ranch publishes to be available under a subscription model.

Which they are if you subscribe to Safari Books or something similar.

You are so clueless.
[doublepost=1481559925][/doublepost]

What do you Swift programmers do when the client wants the same app to also run on Android? Is there an easy path from Swift code to an Android executable app?

Pay someone to deal with the POS that is called Android Studio and Java and release it a year later.
[doublepost=1481560443][/doublepost]

Objective-C actually has a pretty small and simple set of rules compared to Swift.

The challenging things with Obj-C, IMO, are the idea of message passing instead of calling functions/methods, and the funky syntax.

Once you get a handle on both of those, you're good to go (as far as languages, then there's the frameworks/design patterns you need to learn).

On the other hand, Apple's Swift book and the video courses I've done on Swift for each major release... the features and rules seem suffocating. Like Swift looks so much cleaner and easier at first, but once you really tour the language it gets a lot harder and complex, quick. Because Swift doesn't trust you the programmer, it trusts only the compiler.

And honestly, I think even though Apple pushes it, it's a really bad idea to start any project in Swift right now. There's eventually going to be some techtonic shift that's going to change the game entirely. Or in other words, what you see and learn today, won't apply tomorrow. They should be marketing this as a hobby and the default language for iOS and Mac dev for now.

Tell that to IBM and all the other companies that use Swift or all the developers on stack overflow that use it and love it. You are as clueless as PizzaBoxStyle.

 

[dantastic]

lol Swift is light years ahead of Obj-C in terms of readability. Hence why it's easier for new programmers to understand it. Veteran Obj-C programmers who have transitioned to Swift find Swift very clean, readable and modern.

3rd party libraries are not required. It sometimes just makes it easier as many libraries for all languages do.

The only advantage Obj-C has right now is that code updates are not required. Understandable of course.

Lol? I'm going to call ******** on that argument entirely. It's down to preference. I might be too old, I don't know. I far prefer the verbose nature of Objective C compared to Swift. I have still to see a Swift app that isn't just a bit 'messy'.

The Swift toolset is nowhere near the maturity of the Objective C toolset.
Objective C is still running rings around Swift performance wise in real apps.

Simple things may be simpler with Swift. But to say it is easier for a new programmer to pick up I wouldn't agree with. Swift has many advanced features you'd want to spend a few years programming before you can appreciate the nuances.

I, like many others, are transitioning to Swift, it is clearly going to be massive but your comments come across as a small bit childish. Swift will need several more years cooking in the oven before it can compete with Objective C.

 

[Superhai]

Most people negative to Swift seem to be either afraid of change, and obsoleting their invested time in older languages, or they dislike strong typing and want to continue their sloppy way of programming. They spend every chance to discredit it, even the most minuscule thing. Of course Swift is not perfect, but neither is anything else made of humans. There is also the question of philosophy in a language, which is why a good programmer should know different ones. Find that Swift is really easy to read, easy to write. Most beginners find it easy, mostly if I meet someone who don't like it, the control question is what their tutors opinion is about Swift (and/or Apple), and yeah there is a pattern.

 

[PizzaBoxStyle]

You are so clueless.
[doublepost=1481559925][/doublepost]

Pay someone to deal with the POS that is called Android Studio and Java and release it a year later.
[doublepost=1481560443][/doublepost]

Tell that to IBM and all the other companies that use Swift or all the developers on stack overflow that use it and love it. You are as clueless as PizzaBoxStyle.

I'm clueless? Read the freaking post handles!

You just said that I'm as clueless as myself. Nice job, bud. Looks like you could really use the strict typing system that Swift offers. Because if you're going to insult me, at least do it without embarrassing yourself.
[doublepost=1481562799][/doublepost]

Most people negative to Swift seem to be either afraid of change, and obsoleting their invested time in older languages, or they dislike strong typing and want to continue their sloppy way of programming. They spend every chance to discredit it, even the most minuscule thing. Of course Swift is not perfect, but neither is anything else made of humans. There is also the question of philosophy in a language, which is why a good programmer should know different ones. Find that Swift is really easy to read, easy to write. Most beginners find it easy, mostly if I meet someone who don't like it, the control question is what their tutors opinion is about Swift (and/or Apple), and yeah there is a pattern.

We spend every chance wondering if Swift is better than what we already had, or if we are trading one set of problems for another.
[doublepost=1481563285][/doublepost]Just gonna leave this here while everyone's all fired up!

https://twitter.com/aaronhillegass/status/802588819883102212

 

[netwalker]

Okay, my huge bitch about printed books, and ebooks is that Apple charges retail price for all of the ebooks I've looked at, or damn near retail price. I have almost been willing to buy a droid tablet and use the Amazon reader apps just to save like over 50% off some books for not using an Apple device. (...) Why should I pay hard in-my-hand retail price for a collection of bits that costs nothing to provide to me.

I buy my DRM free IT ebooks usually directly from the publisher. Printing is not the relevant cost factor here. No reason to stop using my iPad to read ebooks.

 

[crashoverride77]

I'm clueless? Read the freaking post handles!

You just said that I'm as clueless as myself. Nice job, bud. Looks like you could really use the strict typing system that Swift offers. Because if you're going to insult me, at least do it without embarrassing yourself.
[doublepost=1481562799][/doublepost]

We spend every chance wondering if Swift is better than what we already had, or if we are trading one set of problems for another.
[doublepost=1481563285][/doublepost]Just gonna leave this here while everyone's all fired up!

https://twitter.com/aaronhillegass/status/802588819883102212

I am not the one who wrote this drivel

"The future of software development isn't this hot poop filled bag of a cranky language grafted onto 30-year-old frameworks. Looking at the landscape, if this is Apple's answer for how apps are going to be developed going into future, they lost. Game. Over."

So yeah you are clueless.

 

[PizzaBoxStyle]

I am not the one who wrote this drivel

"The future of software development isn't this hot poop filled bag of a cranky language grafted onto 30-year-old frameworks. Looking at the landscape, if this is Apple's answer for how apps are going to be developed going into future, they lost. Game. Over."

So yeah you are clueless.

My opinion still doesn't absolve you of your incompetence or bad comprehension.

Also, you've clearly got absolutely nothing if all you can articulate is an attack with "clueless."

 

[crashoverride77]

My opinion still doesn't absolve you of your incompetence or bad comprehension.

Also, you've clearly got absolutely nothing if all you can articulate is an attack with "clueless."

if let clueless = PizzaBoxStyle {
print("I am clueless")
}

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

I buy my DRM free IT ebooks usually directly from the publisher. Printing is not the relevant cost factor here. No reason to stop using my iPad to read ebooks.

Well, something changed. The ebooks for the Kindle are just a few dollars off the price of the printed physical books. I guess I'll be buying the new ebooks when the updates are released. So instead of lowering the prices, they raised the ebook price. Dang...

 

[buckwheet]

Despite its youth and frustrating speed of evolution, Swift very nearly made the top 10 languages of 2016—beaten out narrowly by Go. So claims about how terrible or useless it is, or how Apple are doomed if this is their way forward, are clearly just empty opinions. Please just go for a long walk next time, rather than burden us with your feelings...

 

[Rtyrell]

Contemplate this:

// begin the disaster

class MyClass
{

func stateFunction() -> () -> String
{
func internalFunction()-> String
{
return x
}
}​

}

​

let myClass : MyClass = MyClass()

let r : String = myClass.stateFunction()() + + " Swift is a f##### disaster!"

/// end the horror

*any* language that so blithely allows such horrible code to be written and executed should never take hold.

A novice programmer (the type targeted by swift) will have no clue as to the dangers the above posses to pointer unwinding. The mind boggles when contemplating all the havoc embedded functions can cause. As for the logic itself - think of correlated sub queries 8 levels deep in PL-SQL....

Sounds fun right? Code you would feel comfortable taking ownership of and hiring other clever newbies to maintain???

Blocks in obj-c are a pain in the arse for a reason...