5 ms·

So it looks like the language isn't open source and won't target non-Apple runtimes? I'm not trying to troll, I just think that it's a pity that Apple tends to

So it looks like the language isn't open source and won't target non-Apple runtimes? I'm not trying to troll, I just think that it's a pity that Apple tends to limit the ecosystem and applications of its otherwise-great languages. Building against LLVM ought to make it fairly trivial to make this cross-platform.

munchor 12y ago
Now that Microsoft has been open sourcing so much stuff I was expecting Apple to follow the wave and release Swift as open source too. It's a shame though.
- davidw 12y ago
  I'm old enough to remember Apple suing Microsoft for "copying their look and feel". Open source is something Apple only does strategically - when they have to or it suits them - it is not part of the company's ethos. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Computer,_Inc._v._Microsoft_Corp http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Computer,_Inc._v._Microso....
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - andrewtbham 12y ago
    Yeh, I agree. I was surprised when they open sourced webkit. But like you said, it's strategic. I don't think they care that much about the browser. Their emphasis is on apps running in their ecosystem.
    - tsuraan 12y ago
      They didn't have a choice about webkit; it was a fork of KHTML, which was a part of KDE (and available under the terms of the GPL).
      - timgws 12y ago
        Actually, WebKit was a fork of KHTML, correct, but it is licensed under the terms of LGPL. One extra letter, but a world of difference. This is why they had to open source KHTML, but they could get away with not open sourcing Safari (if KHTML was licensed under the GPL, any app that linked against the library would need to be licensed under the GPL, too.) Let's not forget that webkit when it was released was little more then a code dump - one big patch that had to be applied to KHTML.
        eduo 12y ago
        Also "they didn't have a choice" sort of ignores that they did have the choice of not using khtml and wouldn't have, if its license could've been problematic for them.
  - wdr1 12y ago
    > Open source is something Apple only does strategically - when they have to or it suits them - it is not part of the company's ethos. What Fortune 500 (or even 5000) systematically open sources every piece of technology? Every company I can think of -- Yahoo, Microsoft, Google, Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, Amazon, LinkedIn, AOL, Craigslist, Oracle, -- selectively decides what to open source. I'm not saying that's right or wrong, but Apple is far from alone in doing so.
    - davidw 12y ago
      None of them are 100% open or closed, but clearly some are more open than others.
      - eonil 12y ago
        more open? what a funny joke i ever heard. please define the meaning of the more, and at least tell who is the more open one.
    - dworzanski 12y ago
      Red Hat.
dclowd9901 12y ago
This is only a bit of a bummer because I already expected as much.
United857 12y ago
Is there anything to stop a independent implementation? Like C#/.Net and Mono?
- yulaow 12y ago
  Well if the core of the language is licensed and closed source (is it?) and they do not make a standard iso, it's really problematic to reimplement it in another platform. Both from a legal that from a technical pov.
- nothiggs 12y ago
  Just look at the latest ruling on Oracle vs. Google using Java...
- tenken 12y ago
  horrible adoption?
- _random_ 12y ago
  No point?
wmf 12y ago
Realistically all the Kits aren't (officially) portable anyway.
joezydeco 12y ago
Combine this with their OpenGL replacement ("Metal") and that pretty much kills any cross-platform at all doesn't it?
- vincetogo 12y ago
  It's not too hard to write a graphic engine that abstracts out the graphics API, but it would have to be done in a language other than Swift...
octopus 12y ago
Open source or not, Swift will never be appealing for the world outside Apple's garden if it will be as intertwined with Cocoa as Objective-C currently is. It will be nice however to see how well Swift could be ported to Android.
msoad 12y ago
You can see first chapter of the book here http://imgur.com/a/AuzGw http://imgur.com/a/AuzGw I've uploaded it just now
- msoad 12y ago
  Why I get down votes? It's a free book. People on other platforms can't access it.
  - JimmaDaRustla 12y ago
    Welcome to HN where it seems everyone disregards others work/opinions if they have any reasoning that may only make sense to them. I'll get down voted for this, and it will be truly ironic.
    - richardlblair 12y ago
      But it will be worth it. Bring on the Downvotes!
- waterfowl 12y ago
  thanks for this. I clicked their link(on my less than a year old ~$2000 MBP) and it opened iBooks and sat there with a loading icon for minutes. My first and last experience opening iBooks.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
- rgbrgb 12y ago
  That's a different Swift.
- ianburrell 12y ago
  Different Swift language. That is a "parallel scripting language" for scientists and is written in Java.
- jonursenbach 12y ago
  This link is for a previously existing Swift language.
maaaats 12y ago
I can't even view the book about the language without having an Apple device or installing Apple software.
- eduo 12y ago
  It's available online in html: https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/ios/documentation/Swift/Conceptual/Swift_Programming_Language/BasicOperators.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40014097-CH6-XID_70 https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/ios/documenta... I assume you'd need a developer account, though.
- gyhbv 12y ago
  The book is ePub with no DRM. You don't need an apple device. You could download it on iTunes on windows, and read it with any ePub reader. if you don't want to install itunes i guess you could get a friend to email you a copy.
binarycrusader 12y ago
There's no indications yet that it won't be. I suspect a large part of it will be part of a timed-release with their next merge to LLVM. But only Apple knows for sure.

munchor 12y ago

Now that Microsoft has been open sourcing so much stuff I was expecting Apple to follow the wave and release Swift as open source too. It's a shame though.

davidw 12y ago
I'm old enough to remember Apple suing Microsoft for "copying their look and feel". Open source is something Apple only does strategically - when they have to or it suits them - it is not part of the company's ethos. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Computer,_Inc._v._Microsoft_Corp http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Computer,_Inc._v._Microso....
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- andrewtbham 12y ago
  Yeh, I agree. I was surprised when they open sourced webkit. But like you said, it's strategic. I don't think they care that much about the browser. Their emphasis is on apps running in their ecosystem.
  - tsuraan 12y ago
    They didn't have a choice about webkit; it was a fork of KHTML, which was a part of KDE (and available under the terms of the GPL).
    - timgws 12y ago
      Actually, WebKit was a fork of KHTML, correct, but it is licensed under the terms of LGPL. One extra letter, but a world of difference. This is why they had to open source KHTML, but they could get away with not open sourcing Safari (if KHTML was licensed under the GPL, any app that linked against the library would need to be licensed under the GPL, too.) Let's not forget that webkit when it was released was little more then a code dump - one big patch that had to be applied to KHTML.
      - eduo 12y ago
        Also "they didn't have a choice" sort of ignores that they did have the choice of not using khtml and wouldn't have, if its license could've been problematic for them.
- wdr1 12y ago
  > Open source is something Apple only does strategically - when they have to or it suits them - it is not part of the company's ethos. What Fortune 500 (or even 5000) systematically open sources every piece of technology? Every company I can think of -- Yahoo, Microsoft, Google, Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, Amazon, LinkedIn, AOL, Craigslist, Oracle, -- selectively decides what to open source. I'm not saying that's right or wrong, but Apple is far from alone in doing so.
  - davidw 12y ago
    None of them are 100% open or closed, but clearly some are more open than others.
    - eonil 12y ago
      more open? what a funny joke i ever heard. please define the meaning of the more, and at least tell who is the more open one.
  - dworzanski 12y ago
    Red Hat.

dclowd9901 12y ago

This is only a bit of a bummer because I already expected as much.

United857 12y ago

Is there anything to stop a independent implementation? Like C#/.Net and Mono?

yulaow 12y ago
Well if the core of the language is licensed and closed source (is it?) and they do not make a standard iso, it's really problematic to reimplement it in another platform. Both from a legal that from a technical pov.
nothiggs 12y ago
Just look at the latest ruling on Oracle vs. Google using Java...
tenken 12y ago
horrible adoption?
_random_ 12y ago
No point?

wmf 12y ago

Realistically all the Kits aren't (officially) portable anyway.

joezydeco 12y ago

Combine this with their OpenGL replacement ("Metal") and that pretty much kills any cross-platform at all doesn't it?

vincetogo 12y ago
It's not too hard to write a graphic engine that abstracts out the graphics API, but it would have to be done in a language other than Swift...

octopus 12y ago

Open source or not, Swift will never be appealing for the world outside Apple's garden if it will be as intertwined with Cocoa as Objective-C currently is. It will be nice however to see how well Swift could be ported to Android.

msoad 12y ago

You can see first chapter of the book here http://imgur.com/a/AuzGw http://imgur.com/a/AuzGw I've uploaded it just now

msoad 12y ago
Why I get down votes? It's a free book. People on other platforms can't access it.
- JimmaDaRustla 12y ago
  Welcome to HN where it seems everyone disregards others work/opinions if they have any reasoning that may only make sense to them. I'll get down voted for this, and it will be truly ironic.
  - richardlblair 12y ago
    But it will be worth it. Bring on the Downvotes!
waterfowl 12y ago
thanks for this. I clicked their link(on my less than a year old ~$2000 MBP) and it opened iBooks and sat there with a loading icon for minutes. My first and last experience opening iBooks.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

rgbrgb 12y ago
That's a different Swift.
ianburrell 12y ago
Different Swift language. That is a "parallel scripting language" for scientists and is written in Java.
jonursenbach 12y ago
This link is for a previously existing Swift language.

maaaats 12y ago

I can't even view the book about the language without having an Apple device or installing Apple software.

eduo 12y ago
It's available online in html: https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/ios/documentation/Swift/Conceptual/Swift_Programming_Language/BasicOperators.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40014097-CH6-XID_70 https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/ios/documenta... I assume you'd need a developer account, though.
gyhbv 12y ago
The book is ePub with no DRM. You don't need an apple device. You could download it on iTunes on windows, and read it with any ePub reader. if you don't want to install itunes i guess you could get a friend to email you a copy.

binarycrusader 12y ago

There's no indications yet that it won't be. I suspect a large part of it will be part of a timed-release with their next merge to LLVM. But only Apple knows for sure.