4 ms·
Legacy code. That's the primary reason some people haven't jumped the Swift bandwagon. Newness (which includes rapid, breaking changes in language and still-t
by blunte 9y ago
Legacy code. That's the primary reason some people haven't jumped the Swift bandwagon.
Newness (which includes rapid, breaking changes in language and still-to-be-improved tooling) would be number two.
- ioquatix 9y agoI've got apps that were originally Objective-C and I've migrated parts of the app to Swift and it's been a great experience in almost every respect. I'm honestly surprised at how seamless the experience has been, given that the app is 10 years old and had a pile of very Objective-C specific things (e.g. NSClassFromName or whatever that API is called).
- kalleboo 9y agoOn the contrary I've had a lot of problems with the ObjC-Swift interop, to the point where I've mostly given up on integrating Swift into existing ObjC projects. Like most of the other problems with Swift, this comes down to tooling issues. Xcode's "jump to definition" taking me to auto-generated interop header files, "AppName-Swift.h missing" errors, the debugger losing track of a stacktrace in the transition between languages...
- apple4ever 9y agoUgliness. That’s a primary reason too. Difficult ness in a bad syntax. Also a primary reason.
- abritinthebay 9y agoCompared to Obj-C?? Unless you’re a Java or ASP developer I can’t see an uglier syntax in common usage.
- astrange 9y agoObjC/SmallTalk syntax has been working great for 30 years now. It’s the second best language with named method parameters besides AVISynth.
- abritinthebay 9y agoSo has Forth. This is not a good argument.