- Thread Starter
- #26
Not even enough interest for anyone on here to say they want it.
Not even enough interest for anyone on here to say they want it.
Already wrong assumption.
BECAUSE YOU WANT TO HAVE IT. Simple as that.
This is a special case of the general case why I'm not interested in vendor-specific "open" platforms like Dart, Kotlin, or Swift.
There seems to be a disconnect between what you are discussing and Swift's use on the Server.
When was the last time you developed a server side application in Swift or even looked at its use for server side development? To which particular language bindings are you referring?
IBM does a large amount of Swift development, they just stopped development of Kitura, their own server side framework. That happened mostly because they got there too early. Apple had not yet produced the Linux tools needed to have it be a first class development platform. Since then, Apple has added much better tooling, and third parties (including Microsoft) have added LSP support for Swift.
You say this based on what? Apple is an active participant in the Server Side Swift Working Group, and has steadily added open functionality for this market.
Foundation, SwiftNIO, libdispatch are all part of the open release. No one tried to promote Objective-C as a server side language. People wrote runtimes that were supposed to be compatible with Apple's but they were not from Apple, and given that even many macOS/iOS developers only used Obj-C for UI code (with C/C++ for most other stuff), not much of a surprise that there was not substantial adoption.
Swift's use on the server has nothing to do with Apple's platforms, so I am not how it is "vendor-specific".
The Server Side Swift Working Group has the following members:
Swift is an open source project, and the use of Swift on the server is driven by a large community with Apple being only a small part. Were Apple to suddenly change the language in a fundamental way, nothing would stop the community from forking it.
You certainly did. The first person on the thread that did.
Again, mainly from the information gathered by IBM pulling out of server-side Swift (and not just Kitura it seems).
I would agree with you.
All of which have borne fruit. Since those decisions were made, the open source Swift Package Manager was released with solid build support for Linux, and Apple released SourceKit-LSP enabling third party IDE support for Swift (of which there are now several). Adopting SPM in Xcode makes cross development for Linux much easier, as does the substantially improved Docker support. Amazon jointly developed an AWS Lambda Swift runtime and their Prime Video team built their core system on Smoke, a server side swift framework they have since released publicly as another open source, server side swift framework. In other words, in the two years since that article was written, the issues that made IBM drop its own server side Swift framework, have been resolved.
Objective-C, even in the iOS/macOS world was primarily used for building user interfaces. Given that none of the tools nor any of the libraries that made it interesting on those platforms was open source, it should not surprise anyone that it did not receive adoption outside of those platforms.
Based on the response to this thread, I am not that surprised. The attitude towards Swift here seems to be characterized as somewhere between disinterest and genuine hostility.
I was a bit curious why Apple wouldn't maintain a port. They have done a lot for FreeBSD's base. If I didn't see this response, I would say for the person who wants Swift to ask Apple to maintain a port, since he wants to see it there.
majortom 's responsibility to do something helpful to get Swift ported more than anyone else's. Instead of shaming and blaming, for something he wants, while others aren't very interested in it.
Please show me anywhere in my posts I asked anyone to do anything other than express interest if they had any. Also, please show me where I blame anyone for not doing something I want done?
Your information from “a long time ago” is clearly up to date. I am pretty sure that Prime Video’s core services written in Smoke, run on “Apple and i-products”, so you must be right.
Again, please quote from any of my posts, where I asked you, anyone on this forum, or for that matter anyone from any part of the part of the FreeBSD organization to do anything other than express interest.
I would say the reason that Apple has not done a port to FreeBSD, is that almost no one here, or on the Swift Forum has expressed any interest in having such a port. I came here to see if there was interest, and what I found was that there seems to be a great deal of hostility to even asking if people might want it.
Swift is support on macOS, Linux (three distributions), Windows and Web Assembly. That seems pretty portable. Given that no one here seems to have any interest in it (“It’s only for i-products”, “I would recommend against any one using it”), why would anyone spend any energy doing anything to bring it to this platform?
Please show me where in any of my posts I said it was your responsibility to do anything other than express interest (or even lack there of) in having it on the platform.
What demands have I made? Are you even reading my actual posts or just parroting the comments of others?
Actually, other than your responses, there really have not been any that were helpful.
Maybe that would answer the previous question of yours.
Ports don't magically appear, and people politely told you, that someone has to do the work to have a port made. You don't want to hear how ports are made, yet someone has to know how ports are made for ports to be made. I'm sick of your attitude. Go use Linux. Please, do us a favor.
