3 ms·
I find the performance tooling and package management situation in Swift via Xcode and Instruments is, in my experience, much better than a typical out-of-the-b
by danpalmer 3y ago
I find the performance tooling and package management situation in Swift via Xcode and Instruments is, in my experience, much better than a typical out-of-the-box Java setup with a popular IDE. IDE features may be better in something like Intellij (I'm not a fan personally), but the language tooling isn't better in my experience. The swift+llvm+lldb setup is nice, Swift Package Manager is really nice, much nicer than Maven/Gradle in my experience. So yeah, better at the low end.
Linux/Windows tooling is lacking, I'll give you that, but given where Swift started from I feel like they're already outside the norm for Swift development and debatably "low end" on complexity (although not deployment, I haven't had a problem with Linux deployment).
By "high end" I mean anything that is trying to do complex runtime analysis, and the sort of tuning that you can do on the JVM that is way outside my comfort zone.
- enterprise_cog 3y agoYou should probably list some concrete examples of how it is better. Otherwise it’s just an opinion with no insights.
- danpalmer 3y agoConcretely, the whole Instruments suite is far beyond anything I've managed to get out of a JetBrains IDE. I realise they have some of this stuff, but in my experience it's far from easy to use, and it costs money, which Xcode/Instruments do not.
- eviks 3y agoI thought the "low end" would mean the ability to skip the huge XCode and building your project with a popular text editor/ide (that's also where Linux/Windows wouldn't have to lack)
- danpalmer 3y agoAh, no, I mean more the lowest barrier to entry end, i.e. what early tutorials will focus on, what newcomers to the ecosystem are expected to be using. "Install Xcode, click New Project" is a much lower barrier to entry than setting up the toolchain in other ways.