3 ms·

These days I mainly write Rust but I did write a semi complex iOS app and enjoyed Swift. I just didn't love how slow the type checker was and how it got lost. I

These days I mainly write Rust but I did write a semi complex iOS app and enjoyed Swift. I just didn't love how slow the type checker was and how it got lost. I recall having to break things into smaller bits to help the compiler, and there were some oddities about the language. The gap between the two languages is quite small, it just makes me wish Apple was also all-in on Rust

DenisChetwynd 4mo ago
maybe so on the surface, but it remains quite massive underneath; these languages are fundamentally different and target entirely different use cases
- airstrike 4mo ago
  I'm not sure Rust has one specific use case as its main goal, despite being immediately suitable for systems programming. I use it for making user-facing desktop applications, to name one example.
MBCook 4mo ago
In the last year they’ve added improvements to the type checker to speed it up, those would have been released now. They have further and much more significant changes that I think might have recently landed in the development version. That should make an even bigger difference. But it’s not in a released version yet. And yes, none of us like that one part of Swift. Especially the DRASTIC difference compared to objective-C which really only checked syntax and little else. It’s still probably my favorite language right now though I don’t get to write in it much.
inkyoto 4mo ago
I see Swift as a more approachable version of Rust. If somebody is mulling over Rust but finds it too difficult to grasp, they could start off with Swift first and then move over to Rust. One of the main advantages of Rust is a more developed and thriving ecosystem.
- stasomatic 4mo ago
  It has an unfortunate name though, maybe a short shelf life. Rust++ doesn’t seem inviting either.
  - steveklabnik 4mo ago
    Rust does not have a ++ operator, so that name would make no sense.
    - stasomatic 4mo ago
      Not yet.
      - kibwen 4mo ago
        I can assure you that Rust will never have a ++ operator. Not only is it semantically bizarre, it's entirely unnecessary in a language where iteration is overwhelmingly performed via iterators rather than via manually incrementing array indices.
        stasomatic 4mo ago
        Is that a bullet point in the Rust manifesto? :) In any case, ++ has taken another meaning outside of operator loading and such some. The “Rust” branding, to this rando, implies corrosion, oxidation, decay, regardless of the true origin of the name. Swift is “quick”, Java is “caffeine”, Rust is something I need kerosene for.
        airstrike 4mo ago
        Rust isn't named after what you think it is, but after fungi.
        steveklabnik 4mo ago
        Yes, it is pretty universally agreed upon that a ++ operator in Rust doesn’t make any sense. += 1 is barely longer, not special cased, and does not make users memorize odd precedence rules.
geodel 4mo ago
Apple is not going bet all on language whose roadmap they do not control 100%.

DenisChetwynd 4mo ago

maybe so on the surface, but it remains quite massive underneath; these languages are fundamentally different and target entirely different use cases

airstrike 4mo ago
I'm not sure Rust has one specific use case as its main goal, despite being immediately suitable for systems programming. I use it for making user-facing desktop applications, to name one example.

MBCook 4mo ago

In the last year they’ve added improvements to the type checker to speed it up, those would have been released now. They have further and much more significant changes that I think might have recently landed in the development version. That should make an even bigger difference. But it’s not in a released version yet. And yes, none of us like that one part of Swift. Especially the DRASTIC difference compared to objective-C which really only checked syntax and little else. It’s still probably my favorite language right now though I don’t get to write in it much.

inkyoto 4mo ago

I see Swift as a more approachable version of Rust. If somebody is mulling over Rust but finds it too difficult to grasp, they could start off with Swift first and then move over to Rust. One of the main advantages of Rust is a more developed and thriving ecosystem.

stasomatic 4mo ago
It has an unfortunate name though, maybe a short shelf life. Rust++ doesn’t seem inviting either.
- steveklabnik 4mo ago
  Rust does not have a ++ operator, so that name would make no sense.
  - stasomatic 4mo ago
    Not yet.
    - kibwen 4mo ago
      I can assure you that Rust will never have a ++ operator. Not only is it semantically bizarre, it's entirely unnecessary in a language where iteration is overwhelmingly performed via iterators rather than via manually incrementing array indices.
      - stasomatic 4mo ago
        Is that a bullet point in the Rust manifesto? :) In any case, ++ has taken another meaning outside of operator loading and such some. The “Rust” branding, to this rando, implies corrosion, oxidation, decay, regardless of the true origin of the name. Swift is “quick”, Java is “caffeine”, Rust is something I need kerosene for.
        airstrike 4mo ago
        Rust isn't named after what you think it is, but after fungi.
        steveklabnik 4mo ago
        Yes, it is pretty universally agreed upon that a ++ operator in Rust doesn’t make any sense. += 1 is barely longer, not special cased, and does not make users memorize odd precedence rules.

geodel 4mo ago

Apple is not going bet all on language whose roadmap they do not control 100%.