/g/ loves IBM but hates Apple. How, then, does /g/ feel about

Why would anyone use a language designed specifically around compatibility with Obj-C outside Apple's ecosystem?

>>62165890
Because it isn't controlled by IBM's more direct competitors, Oracle (Java), Google (Go, Dart), and Microsoft (C#).

>>62165958
But why would anyone who's not an IBM employee care about it? Besides, it's basically controlled by Apple, which is even worse.

>>62165794
/g/ hates the current IBM.

/g/ is nostalgic for the almost excessive hardware engineering excellence from the bygone era of IBM near monopoly.

Software has always been IBM's week spot.

>>62165794
I don't give a shit, it's swift takes over the enterprise world that would be a good thing given how piss easy it is to do thing with swift.

File: 1503441271486.png (9KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 500x500px

>>62165794
>having feelings towards technology companies

swift is forced meme language btw

>>62166015
It's a nicer language than Java or Go, and arguably even C#. It uses ARC instead of a tracing garbage collection, which some like. Apple doesn't control Swift the way Oracle controls Java because Swift isn't a product Apple sells.

Nice language but Kotlin is better. Too bad it runs on the JVM.

>>62166124
it's awesome it runs in the JVM. I love the cross-platform ability

>>62166105
> Apple doesn't control Swift the way Oracle controls Java because Swift isn't a product Apple sells.
No one sells languages/compilers nowadays, you give the development tools for free and sell the platform instead. In this sense, Swift/iOS is exactly like Java/JVM and C#/.NET.

>>62165890
>specifically around compatibility with Obj-C
but that's simply wrong.

>>62166180
Too bad Oracle doesn't sell JVM neither

>>62166124
Considered simply as a language, Kotlin isn't as good as Swift, which has true pattern matching and algebraic data types. Kotlin also lacks lightweight ("real") structs and TCO because of the JVM, but running on the JVM is more of an advantage thanks to all the libraries.

>>62166201
Well, you can't buy standalone iOS either, it's "platform" in a wider sense. But I'm not sure what exactly Oracle's business model in regards to JVM is, how do they make money from it?

>>62166201
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/12/16/oracle_targets_java_users_non_compliance/

>>62166180
Apple mostly sells consumer hardware. Oracle mostly sells enterprise stuff. Both are "platforms", the difference is in the kind of platform.
>In this sense, Swift/iOS is exactly like Java/JVM and C#/.NET.
If they weren't different where it matters, IBM would not have invested in Swift. They have their stake in Java already.

>>62166262
Wtf, that sounds shitty... Why would Oracle do this? They are just helping microsoft spreading .net.

>>62165794
Post some highlights of the lang.

>>62166645
https://learnxinyminutes.com/docs/swift/ has a pretty good overview of the features.
https://appventure.me/2015/08/20/swift-pattern-matching-in-detail

>>62165794
IBM is a glorified patent troll. It was amusing to watch them whine about trigraph removal from the C++ standard.

File: 4bc (1).png (24KB, 165x115px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 165x115px

>>62165794
>/g/ loves IBM but hates Apple
>/g/ loves IBM
>not building your own computer entirely from non-proprietary parts, i.e. from parts you soldered yourself out of electrical components you cast yourself out of metal you smelted yourself out of rocks you excavated yourself out of land you own yourself
>being so much of a brainlet you can't even do that

>>62169164
He probably meant Thinkpads.

>>62169164
>building your own computer entirely from non-proprietary parts, i.e. from parts you soldered yourself out of electrical components you cast yourself out of metal you smelted yourself out of rocks you excavated yourself out of land you own yourself
>2017
>manually casting electrical components
>manually soldering them together
enjoy your slow fragile computer

>>62169145
Why in the world wound you whine about that?

>>62169164
>being so much of a lifelet you can't rebuild civilization from scratch

File: ibm_intellistation_power_185.jpg (358KB, 768x1024px) Image search: [Google]

358KB, 768x1024px

IBM rice was the best rice.

>>62166242
I feel Java overcomplicated, I don't like Java but it's only option for Android Runtime. If Kotlin is more fine for development I will use it.

>>62169204
Their software uses them pretty heavily. Different industrial space.

>>62169249
Wait until Google Fucksya. It's the future m

File: rice.png (923KB, 1713x614px) Image search: [Google]

923KB, 1713x614px

>>62169242
to be fair that shit does look reasonably tasty

>>62169249
Java isn't complicated, it's made for brainlets. The only thing that's simpler to get the hang of is Go.

>>62169293
Java is absolutely complicated. C, Lisp, Clojure, Python, Ruby, and Haskell are all much easier to get the hang of than Java.
In fact I'd argue you CAN'T get the hang of Java.
Because once you've got as much of a hang of it as the language will ever actually let you get, your software is still bad.
It's because of Java's many needless rules that are only there for the sake of familiarity and don't actually improve performance or code structure.
Rather all it does is enforce bad style.
Do you hear that? Java is so complicated it's literally impossible to use well no matter how well you know it.

>>62169371
>Ruby, and Haskell are all much easier to get the hang of than Java.
Oh, you're just shitposting.

>>62169164
Transistors are propiretary

>>62169371
>In fact I'd argue you CAN'T get the hang of Java.
No need to conflate "bad" or "encourages bad style" with "incomprehensible".

File: 1gw8yqg2.png (76KB, 987x871px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 987x871px

>>62169464
>he didn't actually read the post he's refuting

Realistically, what will replace Java and the JVM?

Oracle is being a patent troll with Java, so IBM has to switch languages or all their software will become in danger of being unusable

>>62170251
Nothing, JVM had become COBOL, C# lack strength, even if android change for fushia, web server Java still will working for long long long time, node.js,Python,ruby are unstable lack libraries,break changes, very hard to enterprise user, C++ won't become webserver language,neither rust or swift still need massive ecosystem.

>>62170469
Fair point. Okay, what will replace Java and the JVM for new, greenfield projects?

>>62170761
There's no point to abandon jvm.
swift has the whole objective-c ecosystem, so it might be ok.
I think it will be language that focuses on distributed and parallel systems like Chapel or something like that.

>>62170856
>There's no point to abandon jvm.
There is, though. Oracle

File: IMG_0040.jpg (536KB, 1536x2048px) Image search: [Google]

536KB, 1536x2048px

Who "Swift as main language" here?
Feels good. Waiting for Xcode 9 + Swift 4, 2018 will be the year I completely master it.

>>62170761
You really cannot tell. Could be C#, Elixir if it ever gets a JIT, Go 2.0. Dart, Pony, Swift, Crystal, ReasonML or something that doesn't exist yet. On the JVM itself Kotlin has a good chance to replace Java.

>>62170964
How well does it pay?

>>62171032
If you shit a lot of decent apps, it pays quite a lot.

>>62171063
Is that you speaking from experience?

>>62170469
I agree with most but imo apple has a giant ecosystem.

>>62170469
>Python
>unstable
>lacks libraries

>>62165794
IBM has turned to total shit more than a decade ago, friend.

>>62171136
Ecosystem server, Hadoop,spark,load balance,debugger, monitor,IDE, logging,cloud infrastructure,database today Apple begin focus in iOS ecosystem, swift for server need a lot lot work.

>>62171154
Django or any web framework broken version, change on Python just look 2 vs 3, even Python programmer say Python becomes shit on big project or still maintain Python 2.5.

Almost only Java becomes enterprise friendly.

>>62170251
Kotlin on LLVM

>>62170761
On high tech modern fashion go,erlang,node.js, but in average programmer only Microsoft tried use .Net Core, Java becomes safe bet for long long time, or change iOS developer.

>>62165794
I fucking hate Swift. Converting apps from Swift 2 to Swift 3 was the most abhorrent cancer I've ever experienced. Thanks Apple.

>>62171862
Pajeet, is that you?
>Django or any web framework broken version
Actually read the docs about how Django's version numbers work and use the LTS versions.

>>62165794
I've only used it for iOS. I learned the other way around from most people- my first app was Swift 3 and my second was Obj-C. I couldn't ditch Swift fast enough.
>dogshit slow builds
>unreadable!?! optional!?!.syntax!!?!
>can't directly use C code
>can hardly use C++ code at all
>makes basic shit harder for no reason. Can't have a viewcontroller without implementing initWithCoder, even if it just throws an exception, because fuck you

Obj-C has a few weird syntax and intricacies, but:
>it's simple enough overall if you know C
>it results in a very readable codebase when used well
>it compiles extremely quickly, there is lots of tooling available for it
>Apple doesn't completely rewrite it every few weeks
>you can drop C and C++ in there seamlessly

To anyone considering learning iOS dev: Don't use Swift, don't use storyboards, don't even use XIBs. Use Obj-C and write your API programmatically. It's pleasant if you follow those rules.

>>62172156
>Using C code is harder than C++ code
Que?

>>62172168
Sorry if I wasn't clear. To clarify:
>Swift can call C, but it's a pain in the arse. You have to set up a bridging header and use special types to redeclare every function and structure you want to use. With Obj-C, you can just call it directly.
>Swift cannot call C++ at all. You have to write an extern "C" wrapper for the C++ API you want to use, then use the above hacks to call /that/. Meanwhile back in the land of sanity, you can just change the file type to "Objective-C++" and use C++ code directly.

>>62172156
>can't directly use C code
You can. Create foo.h, include the headers you need there, compiler with

-import-objc-header foo.h

, link with the appropriate libraries.

>>62172156
>don't use storyboards, don't even use XIBs
Yeah, I do that, but with Swift.

It's true it's still very slow to compile, but it's syntax is years ahead of Objective-C anon, I don't know what you're on.

IBuMp

>>62165890
It's not designed specifically around that, you mostly see that in the UI libraries.