3 ms·
If you developed the libraries yourself, then you have a point. But if you're using someone else's library, which they maintain, then it seems reasonable to say
by eridius 10y ago
If you developed the libraries yourself, then you have a point. But if you're using someone else's library, which they maintain, then it seems reasonable to say your application is pure Swift.
Note that there's a difference between saying "my application is pure Swift" and "everything is pure Swift". If you're trying to make an argument about safety (as happens when people talk about writing things in Rust), then having the libraries written in that language is important. If you're just trying to say "this is a modern codebase using the latest tooling and APIs", then all that matters is the code you wrote, and not the pre-existing libraries that you link to.
- themihai 10y agoYou turn this into a blame game. If it's pure Swift then 100% of its source code should be Swift. This particular repository is mixed with C libs. From the dictionary: Pure - not mixed or adulterated with any other substance or material.
- eridius 10y agoSo, everything has to be Swift, except for the libraries that you personally have decided don't matter (such as libc)? That's not a very useful definition.