Item — HN Reader

> They don't seem to care.

I don’t believe that’s true. Things are moving constantly, and in the right direction. Then again it would help if you cited particular grievances, because being a regular (cross-platform/cross-target) Swift user I am not sure what you are talking about…

I did not choose ClearSurgery’s example randomly. I was at a conference recently where the CTO was here, and he explicitly told us they were moving fast thanks to the Swift ecosystem. (I am not working there personally, nor am I affiliated.)

2 comments

they seem to be adding more and more keywords

if they really want me to use this lang for everything, they'd have to 1. massively improve compilation speed, 2. get the ecosystem going (what's the correct way to spin up an http server like with express?) and 3. get rid of roughly 150 of the 200 keywords there are

especially w.r.t. the last one, of course everyone frets at huge breaking changes like this, so it won't happen, so people won't use it

> 3. get rid of roughly 150 of the 200 keywords there are

I don't understand this point. Could you explain?

The new keywords enable new language features (ex: async/await, any, actor), and these features are opt-in. If you don't want to use them, you don't have to.

What are they keywords you think should be removed?

> these features are opt-in. If you don't want to use them, you don't have to.

Using a language is more than just writing it with a pre-established knowledge of what subset of features you think is worth the tradeoffs. More keywords/features means when you try to figure out how to do something new, there may be 15 different ways and you need to analyze and figure out which is the best one for this scenario, which ones are nonstarters, etc.

That's was more or less the whole design goal of Go. It was made by C++ programmers who were fed up with how many features were in the language, so they kept the feature set limited. Even the formatting is decided by the language. You may not agree with every decision, but what matters is decisions were made and they're standardized, so everyone is on the same page. You can read anyone else's code, and you know exactly what's going on.

besides it being almost impossible to understand what "the right way of doing stuff" is with Swift (or any bloated language), i absolutely _do_ have to use the keywords.

reading someone else's code is part of working with the language (as is understanding LLM output nowadays). i can't just make others not use the keywords i don't know/beed/like. especially if working within teams, or using OSS.

Fair point, I had not considered needing to read and understand code you didn't write yourself.

Especially in a corporate setting, not understanding a keyword you see in a PR could lead to bad code being checked in.

> I don’t believe that’s true. Things are moving constantly, and in the right direction.

Hah! I'll use that argument if I ever get PIP'd.

No but seriously, constantly moving doesn't mean fast enough. Swift took took long to have cross-platform support.

And it is still uberslow to compile. To the point of language servers giving up on analyzing it and timeout.

Not just uber slow to compile, because as a Rust dev I could take that. But it rejects correct programs without telling you why! The compiler will just time out and ask you to refactor so it has a better shot. I understand that kind of pathological behavior is present in many compilers but I hit it way too often in Swift on seemingly benign code.

Did that happen recently (the compiler just bailing out)?

Because they got much better at that, and it’s been a long while since that happened to me. Like “I don’t even remember when was the last time it happened” long.

The last time I used Swift was 4 months ago. It was recent enough that I'm still salty about it! :P