3 ms·

The nature of Open Source means that any interested party contributes to the project the features it is interested in. Apple is interested in running Swift on

The nature of Open Source means that any interested party contributes to the project the features it is interested in. Apple is interested in running Swift on OSX and iOS. Goolge is interested in running Swift on Linux servers to do to Machine Learning. Windows support has to come from whomever is interested in it. Neither Apple nor Google have a big interest in that. Same with other stuff. I, for example, am interested in using Swift with GTK+. I don't expect Apple or Google to work on that.

pjmlp 6y ago
Google's interest on Swift isn't that much reflected outside when Tensorflow 2020 conference did not spend 1 second on Swift, not even to write a tiny status update blog post. Yet they had enough C++, Android, Python and JavaScript to talk about. C++, Python, Julia, R own Machine Learning. I don't miss Swift on Windows, the JVM and .NET stacks offer plenty of choice, including better GPGPU support across multiple OSes.
- AlphaSite 6y ago
  I think it died the moment Chris Latterner left.
coldtea 6y ago
>The nature of Open Source means that any interested party contributes to the project the features it is interested in Yes, but the reality of Open Source is that unless money are paid, it often goes nowhere for big projects (that need lots of work to port/create libs/etc).
- turbinerneiter 6y ago
  How is that a _but_ to my comment? The interested party is the one who pays for the development of the feature they want, mostly by paying a developer to do it.
  - Redoubts 6y ago
    The "but" is that a million developers somewhat interested in the language but for the lack of platform support wouldn't sum to a relevant interest. I think that's a shame, but still truth.
  - coldtea 6y ago
    >How is that a _but_ to my comment? You wrote: "The nature of Open Source means that any interested party contributes to the project the features it is interested in" And my comment essentially means: Yeah, BUT this "nature of Open Source" is just a mere potentiality. The fact that FOSS allows "any interested party can contribute" means nothing if there's no interested party with deep pockets (or time/skill to contribute).
    - turbinerneiter 6y ago
      I wasn't trying to say that FOSS _allows_ for anyone to contribute but that it _relies_ on that. I was trying to make the point that Swift will be good for the things that the parties who are interested in it need it for. And these interested parties are the deep pockets you are talking about. We might just be saying the same thing :)

pjmlp 6y ago

Google's interest on Swift isn't that much reflected outside when Tensorflow 2020 conference did not spend 1 second on Swift, not even to write a tiny status update blog post. Yet they had enough C++, Android, Python and JavaScript to talk about. C++, Python, Julia, R own Machine Learning. I don't miss Swift on Windows, the JVM and .NET stacks offer plenty of choice, including better GPGPU support across multiple OSes.

AlphaSite 6y ago
I think it died the moment Chris Latterner left.

coldtea 6y ago

>The nature of Open Source means that any interested party contributes to the project the features it is interested in Yes, but the reality of Open Source is that unless money are paid, it often goes nowhere for big projects (that need lots of work to port/create libs/etc).

turbinerneiter 6y ago
How is that a _but_ to my comment? The interested party is the one who pays for the development of the feature they want, mostly by paying a developer to do it.
- Redoubts 6y ago
  The "but" is that a million developers somewhat interested in the language but for the lack of platform support wouldn't sum to a relevant interest. I think that's a shame, but still truth.
- coldtea 6y ago
  >How is that a _but_ to my comment? You wrote: "The nature of Open Source means that any interested party contributes to the project the features it is interested in" And my comment essentially means: Yeah, BUT this "nature of Open Source" is just a mere potentiality. The fact that FOSS allows "any interested party can contribute" means nothing if there's no interested party with deep pockets (or time/skill to contribute).
  - turbinerneiter 6y ago
    I wasn't trying to say that FOSS _allows_ for anyone to contribute but that it _relies_ on that. I was trying to make the point that Swift will be good for the things that the parties who are interested in it need it for. And these interested parties are the deep pockets you are talking about. We might just be saying the same thing :)