4 ms·

Why is the relative size of the apple-oriented community relevant? I'm not saying it's the current status quo, but if the server-side Swift community reaches a

by skohan 6y ago

Why is the relative size of the apple-oriented community relevant? I'm not saying it's the current status quo, but if the server-side Swift community reaches a critical mass where it's easy to get support, and there are plenty of libraries available, it doesn't matter one bit if the iPhone developer community is still 10x larger. This would be like saying coconut is unsuitable for use in pina colladas because it's much more prevalent as an ingredient in curry.

pjmlp 6y ago
Because a language is not an island and the competition is tough. Anyone betting their money on Server side Swift better have a solid story to sell to upper management, why they did not went with Go, Java, .NET, C++20, Rust, OCaml, ..... Right now the only solid story is for Apple shops to share their client code with the server.
- skohan 6y ago
  ROR made Ruby into a mainstream language from a single success story and a usable tool. Swift already has a much bigger developer base, there's no reason it couldn't succeed in other markets as well given the right catalyst.
  - mantap 6y ago
    Apple has a bigger developer base but they are captive users. I'm not saying swift isn't good, but nobody actually chooses to use it. They use because it is the language for making iDevice apps. The problem is that if people are only using a language because they have to, then they are not as incentivised to create the open source projects that swift needs. Ruby had a large number of very enthusiastic users, that's what made the difference.
    - skohan 6y ago
      I think you're describing a chicken-and-egg problem, and you're overstating the extent to which a gap exists in terms of library support. Swift has a very capable standard library, a high-quality, officially supported networking library, and fantastic C and Python interop which can fill a lot of the gaps to the extent they exist. Even in its current state, I can imagine Swift being productive in something like server-less development, where it would offer a nice strongly typed alternative to scripting languages which currently dominate the space. Swift has a lot of intrinsic features which would make it nice to use for server-side development, and I'm sure it would find plenty of users if there were a strong success story to point to. Given the number of users, I'm not convinced the absolute number of Ruby users in 2009 was larger than the number of "swift enthusiasts" today.
      - wool_gather 6y ago
        Have you used the Python interop? I went looking to try it a few months ago and it was MIA as far as I could tell. It seems to be exclusively baked into Tensorflow's fork of the compiler. I would love a pointer if I missed something!
        skohan 6y ago
        Yep, there's a standalone library and it has some system dependencies but it works great: https://github.com/pvieito/PythonKit https://github.com/pvieito/PythonKit
        wool_gather 6y ago
        Thanks; I found that and still couldn't figure it out, but I'll take another look at some point.
    - catach 6y ago
      The captive bit isn't entirely true, as the language has had Objective-C for competition. I suspect that instead of an enthusiasm gap the greater negative impact on FOSS libraries comes from the Apple-platform dev community being strongly oriented around making consumer-focused programs for money.
      - qalmakka 6y ago
        Objective-C is neither easy nor something most people liked. I did actually like it because I always thought it was really cool, but most people I talked with hate it with a passion. For the average Java developer, choosing between Swift and Objective-C is like choosing between cake and a tomato for dessert. Some people might pick Objective-C, but it's definitely not the majority.
        pjmlp 6y ago
        Funny, when Mac OS X was released, it had two programming languages in equal footing Java and Objective-C, because Apple wasn't sure if developers would be keen in using Objective-C, like on NeXTSTEP. They created their own Java implementation, had Sun on stage at WWDC, additional runtime features for integration with OS X frameworks, ported WebObjects to Java. Then the crowd assembled around Objective-C tooling and the rest is history.
  - pjmlp 6y ago
    And to this day the only shops that actually care about Ruby in the West are doing Rails and not much else, to the point Rails == Ruby. Swift has already achieved that, Swift == Apple platforms.
    - skohan 6y ago
      I don't follow your argument. Ruby is a single-use-case language so therefore Swift must also be? I can point to many languages which have achieved adoption in more than one domain as counter-examples.
      - pjmlp 6y ago
        Like Objective-C?
        skohan 6y ago
        Does Objective-C have a 1st party open-source runtime, and Linux and Windows targets in the main CI pipeline?
        wool_gather 6y ago
        It has the former: https://opensource.apple.com/source/objc4/objc4-781/ https://opensource.apple.com/source/objc4/objc4-781/
        skohan 6y ago
        It does now. It was closed source when ObjC was a relevant language
        deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
        wool_gather 6y ago
        It has been available from Apple for at least a decade.
- jmull 6y ago
  Not just to share code, but developers and other parts of the language ecosystem as well. From my perspective Swift is in a trailing group with Go and Rust, chasing C# and Java for new server/service development. Swift is behind, IMO, in supporting server-side development, but ahead in language adoption. That's why the SSWG makes sense. (Probably C/C++ is used for a lot of new server development too, but I feel that's mostly unassailable, at least directly -- I think that's mostly on-going development in systems with heavy ties to existing C/C++ projects where they've already very seriously considered alternatives and rejected them.)

by skohan 6y ago

pjmlp 6y ago

Because a language is not an island and the competition is tough. Anyone betting their money on Server side Swift better have a solid story to sell to upper management, why they did not went with Go, Java, .NET, C++20, Rust, OCaml, ..... Right now the only solid story is for Apple shops to share their client code with the server.

skohan 6y ago
ROR made Ruby into a mainstream language from a single success story and a usable tool. Swift already has a much bigger developer base, there's no reason it couldn't succeed in other markets as well given the right catalyst.
- mantap 6y ago
  Apple has a bigger developer base but they are captive users. I'm not saying swift isn't good, but nobody actually chooses to use it. They use because it is the language for making iDevice apps. The problem is that if people are only using a language because they have to, then they are not as incentivised to create the open source projects that swift needs. Ruby had a large number of very enthusiastic users, that's what made the difference.
  - skohan 6y ago
    I think you're describing a chicken-and-egg problem, and you're overstating the extent to which a gap exists in terms of library support. Swift has a very capable standard library, a high-quality, officially supported networking library, and fantastic C and Python interop which can fill a lot of the gaps to the extent they exist. Even in its current state, I can imagine Swift being productive in something like server-less development, where it would offer a nice strongly typed alternative to scripting languages which currently dominate the space. Swift has a lot of intrinsic features which would make it nice to use for server-side development, and I'm sure it would find plenty of users if there were a strong success story to point to. Given the number of users, I'm not convinced the absolute number of Ruby users in 2009 was larger than the number of "swift enthusiasts" today.
    - wool_gather 6y ago
      Have you used the Python interop? I went looking to try it a few months ago and it was MIA as far as I could tell. It seems to be exclusively baked into Tensorflow's fork of the compiler. I would love a pointer if I missed something!
      - skohan 6y ago
        Yep, there's a standalone library and it has some system dependencies but it works great: https://github.com/pvieito/PythonKit https://github.com/pvieito/PythonKit
        wool_gather 6y ago
        Thanks; I found that and still couldn't figure it out, but I'll take another look at some point.
  - catach 6y ago
    The captive bit isn't entirely true, as the language has had Objective-C for competition. I suspect that instead of an enthusiasm gap the greater negative impact on FOSS libraries comes from the Apple-platform dev community being strongly oriented around making consumer-focused programs for money.
    - qalmakka 6y ago
      Objective-C is neither easy nor something most people liked. I did actually like it because I always thought it was really cool, but most people I talked with hate it with a passion. For the average Java developer, choosing between Swift and Objective-C is like choosing between cake and a tomato for dessert. Some people might pick Objective-C, but it's definitely not the majority.
      - pjmlp 6y ago
        Funny, when Mac OS X was released, it had two programming languages in equal footing Java and Objective-C, because Apple wasn't sure if developers would be keen in using Objective-C, like on NeXTSTEP. They created their own Java implementation, had Sun on stage at WWDC, additional runtime features for integration with OS X frameworks, ported WebObjects to Java. Then the crowd assembled around Objective-C tooling and the rest is history.
- pjmlp 6y ago
  And to this day the only shops that actually care about Ruby in the West are doing Rails and not much else, to the point Rails == Ruby. Swift has already achieved that, Swift == Apple platforms.
  - skohan 6y ago
    I don't follow your argument. Ruby is a single-use-case language so therefore Swift must also be? I can point to many languages which have achieved adoption in more than one domain as counter-examples.
    - pjmlp 6y ago
      Like Objective-C?
      - skohan 6y ago
        Does Objective-C have a 1st party open-source runtime, and Linux and Windows targets in the main CI pipeline?
        wool_gather 6y ago
        It has the former: https://opensource.apple.com/source/objc4/objc4-781/ https://opensource.apple.com/source/objc4/objc4-781/
        skohan 6y ago
        It does now. It was closed source when ObjC was a relevant language
        deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
        wool_gather 6y ago
        It has been available from Apple for at least a decade.
jmull 6y ago
Not just to share code, but developers and other parts of the language ecosystem as well. From my perspective Swift is in a trailing group with Go and Rust, chasing C# and Java for new server/service development. Swift is behind, IMO, in supporting server-side development, but ahead in language adoption. That's why the SSWG makes sense. (Probably C/C++ is used for a lot of new server development too, but I feel that's mostly unassailable, at least directly -- I think that's mostly on-going development in systems with heavy ties to existing C/C++ projects where they've already very seriously considered alternatives and rejected them.)