Must be brand new because the Github links on the site don&#x27;t work (assuming they haven&#x27;t made the repos public yet).

The downloads page on swift.org has links though.

Nobody is saying that – but the site links to a github repo that doesn&#x27;t yet exist. Chill.

Let&#x27;s please stop trying to say GitHub == Open Source.

it is now has projects (:<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift</a>

just released <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift</a>

<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;</a>This organization has no public repositories.

Well, the poster&#x27;s web page says he works at IBM...

Somebody at Apple probably wanted that sweet sweet karma.EDIT: Works at IBM. SORRY.

The site is barely even indexed by Google yet, and the github repo is not even done. I don&#x27;t think it&#x27;s ready yet.

I don&#x27;t see how it was leaked, it&#x27;s on the swift.org homepage.

Ouch, I guess this leaked? Who is the OP?

it is not there. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple</a> is accessible . 
i guess OP somehow found this website and put it into HN. I don&#x27;t even see any press release by Apple related to this thing yet.

<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift</a> is 404 .

Be patient guys. Good things come to those who wait.

Have a look at dlang and nim-Lang. Both answer that

I have worked extensively with both Swift and Go. The currently available Swift implementation in Xcode is fairly closely tied to Cocoa (and hence OS X); I think this would be a serious barrier to generic server-side usage of Swift, so I&#x27;m curious to see if they have done anything about that (and what).Otherwise, it&#x27;s a fairly decent language. It doesn&#x27;t have Go&#x27;s concurrency baked in to the language, but on OS X you can use Grand Central Dispatch (libdispatch) which is a very decent concurrency library and it works very well with Swift, I&#x27;m hoping it will be available in the Linux port of Swift as well.Besides the more sophisticated type system, a major advantage (or disadvantage, depending on how you look at it) of Swift over Go is it&#x27;s memory management mechanism: it uses Automatic Reference Counting, which makes garbage collection more deterministic and efficient, at the expense of a certain level of overhead in the developer&#x27;s thought process (e.g. the developer has to be mindful of things such as reference cycles etc).

I think Swift is a viable competitor for C++ and Nim.D won&#x27;t be fully a player in that space until the GC is fully optional - meaning no library code causes the GC to run unexpectedly.I&#x27;m excited about Swift for desktop&#x2F;simulation&#x2F;gaming&#x2F;embedded development. I&#x27;m sure there&#x27;ll be a Windows port in the near term as well.

esp considering that most external Swift developers will come from iOS developmentI am wondering about this. To me, it seems that there is still space for a modern, pragmatic language that compiles to native code. Coming from C and C++, I have been using Go recently for applications where garbage collection and some performance loss due to a relatively weak compiler is acceptable.However, I still find the lack of parametric polymorphism tedious and annoying as well as other stuff you&#x27;d come to expect from a modern language (algebraic data types, non-nullable types, etc.).Does anyone who has experience with Swift think that it could be a better language for the niches Go has gained traction? (Besides iOS&#x2F;Mac development?)

Node.js made server side Javascript a reality, but it was done by outsiders using Google&#x27;s V8 engine rather than by Google itself.  What would be wrong with server side Swift being similarly pushed by a 3rd party?

This is good news (hoping the github link etc will start working in a day or two)! One side effect of swift being open sourced is that more developers will start looking at it for server side development. However, I personally think that Swift will continue to have strong reliance on Apple (esp considering that most external Swift developers will come from iOS development). So, till I see Apple showing interest in Swift getting used on server side, I&#x27;ll not use it there.

They changed their mind.EDIT: I&#x27;m joking of course. More likely, they realized they accidentally forgot to excise some incredibly sensitive private information from the repo&#x27;s history and are working fast on it before they make the repo public again.

Page not found on GitHub?<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;swift.org&#x2F;source-code&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;swift.org&#x2F;source-code&#x2F;</a>
<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift</a>

Hopefully we&#x27;ll see it on more platforms now!

Wow. Less than 30 minutes pass and site already loading with huge delay.

There is a GitHub Repo you can clone. Just had an issue with traffic.

At first I was like &#x27;AWESOME&#x27;, than I was like &#x27;oh fuck, not ready yet&#x27;. I am not upvoting this, until there is a GitHub repository that I can clone!

Here are my results on a Debian jessie box:If you just want to play with the REPL (usr&#x2F;bin&#x2F;swift in the Ubuntu 14.04 snapshot), all you have to do is:<pre><code> apt-get install python-dev
</code></pre>
If you want to actually compile swift files (usr&#x2F;bin&#x2F;swiftc in the Ubuntu 14.04 snapshot), it appears extremely basic programs will compile with jessie&#x27;s clang-3.5, so all you have to do is:<pre><code> apt-get install clang
</code></pre>
Note that the swift.org instructions claim you need clang-3.6, and you probably do for more complex programs. For that, you&#x27;ll need to temporarily add a sid&#x2F;unstable source and upgrade clang:<pre><code> echo &#x27;deb http:&#x2F;&#x2F;ftp.us.debian.org&#x2F;debian&#x2F; unstable main&#x27; &gt;&gt; &#x2F;etc&#x2F;apt&#x2F;sources.list
 apt-get update
 apt-get install clang
</code></pre>
(don&#x27;t forget to remove the unstable line afterwards).

Looks like they have builds for Ubuntu 14.04 and 15.10. I expect they would work on other debian-based linuxes (linuces?) but haven&#x27;t tried.

There was a blog post about porting it to Linux before the site went down, so it looks like they&#x27;re supporting it with this release.

And slightly more specific, Swift on Android :)  LLVM compiles some code I&#x27;m working on to be part of an Android app; so it should not be too hard (as LLVM is Swift compiler backend).

&quot;OS X, Ubuntu Linux LTS, and the latest Ubuntu Linux release are the current supported host development operating systems.&quot; (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift&#x2F;tree&#x2F;master&#x2F;apinotes" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift&#x2F;tree&#x2F;master&#x2F;apinotes</a>)

Wonders about the state of Swift on Linux? Was expecting this to be timed with the open source announcement.

I find package management unscaleable (ie, it becomes more and more of headache as you pull in dependencies), but the language is much, much nicer to work with and read than Objective-C

&gt; The Swift compiler, on the other hand, will obsessively stop me from fitting a square into a circleYou might really like Haskell :)

Swift is a very nice language. 
And it&#x27;s pretty easy to learn too - it took me about 2 weeks to get the basics of it and in 1 month I was producing code at the same speed as with Objective-C.After a couple of months of Swift-ing, I now started a project in C++ and while it&#x27;s nice to be back home (in the C++ world), I immediately feel like I&#x27;m on my own - C++ doesn&#x27;t make any attempt to protect me from myself (although it feels like I have more power to do what I want).The Swift compiler, on the other hand, will obsessively stop me from fitting a square into a circle and will only allow me to do that if I declare loud and clear that &quot;I know what I&#x27;m doing!&quot;.

I&#x27;ve been developing on iOS since it came out. It is better than ever. Swift is a great language in my opinion – feels very familiar to Objective-C, but is much lighter-weight, and I find that I can spin up projects much more quickly. The type-safety took some getting used to, but pays dividends and has made programs easier to expand and maintain. Plus, I get to pull in ideas from the functional programming community which is great.

How is developing on iOS these days? Swift seems like such nice a nice language.

Wow, Swift.org is getting hammered right now.

Check Twitter, they are more than happy to see their work deprecated.Both Cocoapods and Carthage should eventually be phased out with an official package manager.

Thanks for the link. The repos weren&#x27;t up when I made my comment.

It looks like he managed to go through a whiteboard coding exercise in the end! As far as I know, Apple follows roughly the same hiring practices as Google. Well done (no sarcasm here, it&#x27;s probably great to work at Apple)!

The same guy who wasn&#x27;t offered a job at Google because he didn&#x27;t do well in the interview (or was it code in the interview?)

Interesting to also see Mattt Thompson helped out.

Also of note, the largest contributor to the package manager is Max Howell (mxcl), the creator of Homebrew:<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift-package-manager&#x2F;graphs&#x2F;contributors" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift-package-manager&#x2F;graphs&#x2F;contri...</a>

Positively, CocoaPods was filling a gap that should have been done at system level. So we&#x27;ve updated our FAQ about it, <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;guides.cocoapods.org&#x2F;using&#x2F;faq.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;guides.cocoapods.org&#x2F;using&#x2F;faq.html</a>

It looks like Apple is also releasing an official package manager for swift.[1] I wonder how that will effect Cocoapods.[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;swift.org&#x2F;package-manager" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;swift.org&#x2F;package-manager</a>

yes, although I think it&#x27;s more similar to Carthage than to Cocoapods.

Swift Package Manager? It looks like Apple has developed their own version CocoaPods for Swift? Interesting.

&quot;copyright owned by the contributor&quot; means that as the project matures there will be way too many contributors. To change the license for the project to something that is not Apache-compatible Apple would have to ask every contributor to re-license their code, and if the code author disagrees re-implement corresponding parts. In practice that&#x27;s a signal to every one that the licensing terms are very unlikely to ever change.

Not really.Your typical corporate IP lawyer might feel queasy about the collective copyright aspect, but so much of the open source world works this way now... they can suffer in their jocks.One important question they&#x27;ll ask is: &quot;Who can enforce the copyright and licence?&quot; (Which is when the subtle difference between joint and collective copyright matters.)Non-trivial contributions are made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 Licence, so regardless of who owns the copyright, everyone operates under those same terms.One common rationalisation for copyright assignment is ease of relicensing, should it be necessary. That&#x27;s much less important when operating under the terms of a permissive license.

Aside from the hilarious description of Oracle [t=2107], it&#x27;s worth watching &quot;The Rise and Development of illumos&quot; [1] as it discusses some consequences of signing away copyright on your contributions to an open source project.[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=-zRN7XLCRhc" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=-zRN7XLCRhc</a>

What it means from a legal standpoint is that Apple is bound by the same terms as everybody else.The way it works is this: Apple is making Swift available to you (and others) under Apache 2.0. You send in some changes, which you make available to Apple (and others) under Apache 2.0. Everyone is on equal footing, and Apple can&#x27;t relicense it to someone else on terms of their choosing that involve, for example, neutering the patent grant&#x27;s self-destruct clause.This was the default way that open source worked for years, before people started cargo-culting the (totally unnecessary) CLA process into their projects.What it means from a practical standpoint, though, is that the project is easier to contribute to, what with the impedance imposed by a CLA process being, you know, non-existent.

Anybody knows what effects of the &quot;copyright owned by the contributor&quot; are in the context of Swift&#x27;s Apache license?I guess the &quot;good side&quot; is that the lawyers of other companies probably like when the code made by their programmers keeps being copyrighted by the company. But it is still an Apache license, so they can&#x27;t demand too much from the users of the code.Still, are there any negative aspects? Any imaginable danger?Can the standard library have problems with (once in the future) having different copyright holders for its different parts?

Also full change history since before the project was uploaded to Github.

Apache 2.0 License + Runtime Library Exception + copyright owned by the contributor (i.e. no assignment or CLA) + good community structure and documentation + code of conduct... well done, Apple!

GNUstep developers stated several times that they&#x27;ll implement bindings for Swift if it&#x27;s released as open source. Though from my personal (and very limited) experience I may suggest that you won&#x27;t use it for cross platform development. It&#x27;s works on Linux reasonable well, but support for Windows is limited or at least it&#x27;s was few years ago.

It should be possible to link to GUI libraries implemented in C, like Gtk+.<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift-package-manager&#x2F;blob&#x2F;master&#x2F;Documentation&#x2F;SystemModules.md" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift-package-manager&#x2F;blob&#x2F;master&#x2F;D...</a>

Can this do GUI programming on Lin&#x2F;Win?  Or Are there usable gui libraries for doing cross platform development like QT?

Hope it&#x27;s will have brighter future outside Apple ecosystem. It&#x27;s nice to have more tools for server-side development, but wish it&#x27;s will be better on desktop than ObjC &#x2F; Cocoa &#x2F; GNUstep was.

libdispatch has been open source since 2009<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;libdispatch.macosforge.org&#x2F;post&#x2F;libdispatch-is-open-source&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;libdispatch.macosforge.org&#x2F;post&#x2F;libdispatch-is-open-...</a>

libdispatch is Open Source for a long time now: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.osnews.com&#x2F;story&#x2F;22152&#x2F;Apple_Releases_Grand_Central_Dispatch_as_Open_Source" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.osnews.com&#x2F;story&#x2F;22152&#x2F;Apple_Releases_Grand_Centr...</a>

They&#x27;re releasing the source code to libdispatch? I thought that was one of Apple&#x27;s trade secrets, and more applicable than just Swift apps since it&#x27;s a C lib?

Historically they haven&#x27;t been, and the page about planning for Swift 3.0 says it will introduce breaking changes. (It also mentions that Swift 2.2 will be released in the interim and its compiler will try to warn about things that will be broken in 3.0 so you can get your code ready early.)

so we can take a look at what&#x27;s new in Swift 3Are new versions backwards compatible?

The Foundation stuff is a complete Swift re-implementation of Foundation (fairly impressive goal) and is still in-progress (basic classes like NSArray and NSData look complete but none of NSURLConnection is implemented). They are targeting Swift 3 to have them complete. As the Core Libraries project page says:&quot;These libraries are part of the work towards the future Swift 3 release. They are not yet ready for production use, and in fact are still in the earliest stages of development&quot;

It doesn&#x27;t look like they&#x27;ve opened any of the existing Foundation framework we all know and love and that&#x27;s written in Objective-C. The swift-corelib-foundation repo contains a bunch of .swift files, and those contain lots of calls to NSUnimplemented().The Core Foundation stuff (included in swift-corelib-foundation) has been open for a while: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.opensource.apple.com&#x2F;source&#x2F;CF&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.opensource.apple.com&#x2F;source&#x2F;CF&#x2F;</a>

Well, Swift and C libraries via sysmodules actually.

&gt; This has been sorely needed since about day one of Swift development, glad to see that it&#x27;s been a priority as part of the effort to open source!While not first-party, <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;Carthage&#x2F;Carthage" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;Carthage&#x2F;Carthage</a>Swift&#x27;s appears to possibly be limited to Swift, so Carthage will still be useful to integrate with Objective-C frameworks.

A lot of folks to thank at Apple right now, can&#x27;t wait until all of this propagates so we can take a look at what&#x27;s new in Swift 3. Two thoughts:- VERY happy to see the open sourcing of much of the Foundation libraries (which includes strings, dates, networking primitives, concurrency&#x2F;task queues, I&#x2F;O, etc). It&#x27;ll provide a very strong start and make working with Swift immediately productive.- Holy crap, there&#x27;s a package manager. This has been sorely needed since about day one of Swift development, glad to see that it&#x27;s been a priority as part of the effort to open source!

I guess the fact that there are official Linux packages in the download section are a pretty good hint that there will be Linux support.

Linux support was listed as a design goal for open sourcing Swift @ WWDC

Linux support was officially announced as part of the open source announcement, and Linux downloads are explicitly listed on the site. No need for hints.

I guess the idea is that you will be able to run the same code from your fronted (iOS, OS X) also in the backend (some Linux server).

Linux support is hinted at in examples:<pre><code> #if os(Linux)
 import Glibc
 #else
 import Darwin.C
 #endif
</code></pre>
<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;swift.org&#x2F;package-manager&#x2F;#example-usage" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;swift.org&#x2F;package-manager&#x2F;#example-usage</a>

I think they will co-exist as separate languages for separate problem-solving approaches. Go has first class support for channels and duck-type interfaces, for starters.

I ran into <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;Zewo&#x2F;Epoch" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;Zewo&#x2F;Epoch</a> the other day when I was look for a Swift web server and it looked very interesting.

There is at least already work being done on Swift for server-side development, and a developer behind this just commented that they are getting to work at this moment: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.perfect.org&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.perfect.org&#x2F;</a> <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;PerfectlySoft&#x2F;Perfect" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;PerfectlySoft&#x2F;Perfect</a>

Swift gives you nice syntax and Go provides you good abstraction for concurrency(channel and goroutines).

I&#x27;m much more thrilled about Swift the about Go. Sure Go has a head start in server-side department, but from what I know of Swift I&#x27;d much rather write webapps in it then in Go.Many webapps have a kind of &quot;highlevelness&quot; to them, and Swift nicely addresses that with it&#x27;s features. Go is somehow on a kind of feature diet that&#x27;s just not my cup of tea. And in terms of low-high-level-ness it I put it somewhere in between Swift and the obviously low-level Rust.

I actually don&#x27;t get the attraction of running Go on Android. I see it as a systems language.IMHO, Dart is a much more interesting applications language. And it will soon run on iOS (see <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;flutter.io" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;flutter.io</a>)

I would think Google should be more worried than Apple at this point, since Swift works on iOS but Go support in Android is second-class. In fact, there are significant efforts to run Swift on Android which places it at least on par with Go there (and, obviously, ahead on iOS).

I don&#x27;t see that happening ever. It&#x27;s not just that computers are the core of their business identity&#x2F;culture, but there is too much cross culture of hardware ideas for them to want to ditch it. They&#x27;re free to try some new widget idea in a MacBook then refine it if it works before adding it to the phone or scrap it if it&#x27;s flawed without having millions of iPhone users get upset about it. Most of the other handset makers don&#x27;t have this to test with.

&gt; I wonder if Apple is positionning it as a competitor to Google&#x27;s Go?They&#x27;re giving themselves the option to get out of the computer hardware business if the car takes off without killing their phone business. Think about it. Right now if they killed off the MBP then most devs would switch to Android and they&#x27;d lose their iPhone monopoly. But if Swift gains traction as an open platform, they have the option to stop making hardware and open source or license OS X while still maintaining the dominant position in the smartphone market.I&#x27;m not saying that Apple will definitely get out of hardware. But with Intel&#x27;s rate of innovation slowing down and the R&amp;D for each generation of chips getting exponentially more expensive, one possible future is that the business is not profitable enough to justify the resource drain.

I wonder if Apple is positionning it as a competitor to Google&#x27;s Go? They are hinting at a usage beyond just iOS and OS X.

I used ltrace and saw a call to getenv(&quot;SDKROOT&quot;) but pointing it to any of:export SDKROOT=$HOME&#x2F;swift&#x2F;usrorexport SDKROOT=$HOME&#x2F;swift&#x2F;usr&#x2F;liborexport SDKROOT=$HOME&#x2F;swift&#x2F;usr&#x2F;lib&#x2F;swiftAll the above do not work, maybe when github is up we can see how to do it.

Run Systrace on it and you&#x27;ll see what it is looking for.

Thanks I didn&#x27;t noticed the colon, my fault.But even after copying all to the default location &#x2F;usr it still doesn&#x27;t work:swift swifthello.swift&lt;unknown&gt;:0: error: opening import file for module &#x27;SwiftShims&#x27;: No such file or directoryAlsoswift -I&#x2F;usr&#x2F;lib&#x2F;swift swifthello.swift&lt;unknown&gt;:0: error: opening import file for module &#x27;Swift&#x27;: No such file or directory

Type &quot;:help&quot;. That is, type &lt;colon&gt;help. The : is used to differentiate between commands to the repl and swift code.

It seems to want to find a `SwiftShims.swiftmodule`, fails, prints the error message and then loads the module from an alternate path but it is already too late.<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gist.github.com&#x2F;solidsnack&#x2F;d902a761877b0f797835" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gist.github.com&#x2F;solidsnack&#x2F;d902a761877b0f797835</a>

Testing the binaries on ubuntu decompressed to to $HOME&#x2F;swift and trying to execute swift:Welcome to Swift version 2.2-dev (LLVM 46be9ff861, Clang 4deb154edc, Swift 778f82939c). Type :help for assistance.<pre><code> 1&gt; help
</code></pre>
opening import file for module &#x27;SwiftShims&#x27;: No such file or directory<pre><code> 1&gt;
</code></pre>
I could not find any mention to environment variables that could be used to override default locations, like SWIFT_LIBRARY_PATH or something like it.

They were definitely sued very heavily over face times architecture.

and according to someone I heard on a podcast, many of the engineering leadership heard the open sourcing comment for the first time while Steve was up on stage as well.

Re FaceTime, I recently read an unsubstantiated but plausible comment that they&#x27;d run into patent issues that caused a redesign that caused issues open sourcing it.

According to this reddit thread[1] they were sued for patent infringement[2][1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.reddit.com&#x2F;r&#x2F;apple&#x2F;comments&#x2F;1xuzif&#x2F;what_ever_happened_to_making_facetime_an_open&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.reddit.com&#x2F;r&#x2F;apple&#x2F;comments&#x2F;1xuzif&#x2F;what_ever_hap...</a>[2] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bbc.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;technology-20236114" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bbc.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;technology-20236114</a>

Why would this affect opening the protocol? Patents aren&#x27;t about keeping implementations secret.

&gt; I remember when Steve Jobs went on stage and said that FaceTime would be an open standard. Haven&#x27;t seen that happen yet.FaceTime has been the subject of multiple patent lawsuits, which is what has prevented it from being opened.See: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bbc.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;technology-20236114" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bbc.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;technology-20236114</a> and <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.techzone360.com&#x2F;topics&#x2F;techzone&#x2F;articles&#x2F;2014&#x2F;09&#x2F;29&#x2F;390008-apple-sued-patent-infringement-concerning-facetime-software.htm" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.techzone360.com&#x2F;topics&#x2F;techzone&#x2F;articles&#x2F;2014&#x2F;09&#x2F;...</a>

It&#x27;s great to see them follow through with this. I remember when Steve Jobs went on stage and said that FaceTime would be an open standard. Haven&#x27;t seen that happen yet.

Congratulations on the efforts done by whole involved to make it open source.But I wonder if it will fare better than Objective-C outside Apple eco-systems without the tools and OS libraries...

The source is available now. The git repo&#x27;s not up yet, but it&#x27;s still &#x27;open source&#x27; now.Edit: And now it&#x27;s on GitHub.

@OP: Please change title to &quot;Swift will be Open Source soon&quot; until the git repositories become actually available.

The more I think about this, the more I wonder how existing third-party libraries will respond. Similar to Android and Java, I&#x27;d imagine we&#x27;ll start seeing &quot;vanilla&quot; Swift libraries crop up that only use public&#x2F;standard libraries and can work on iOS&#x2F;OS X apps as well as open source projects.

That was my first thought: Didn&#x27;t Alex talk about that yesterday night. ;-)

Fantastic news that Swift is now open-source, though it came about 4 hours too late for my GotoBerlin presentation on Swift 2 Under the Hood (on SpeakerDeck at <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;speakerdeck.com&#x2F;alblue&#x2F;swift-2-under-the-hood-gotober-2015" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;speakerdeck.com&#x2F;alblue&#x2F;swift-2-under-the-hood-gotobe...</a> if you&#x27;re interested)I&#x27;ve also open-sourced the SIL Inspector that I demonstrated (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;alblue&#x2F;SILInspector" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;alblue&#x2F;SILInspector</a>) and written up a post on InfoQ covering the important points of this release<a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.infoq.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;2015&#x2F;12&#x2F;open-source-swift" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.infoq.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;2015&#x2F;12&#x2F;open-source-swift</a>

Try to compile it and see if you can get it to work?

The Swift port for Linux seems to only support x86-64 for now. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;swift.org&#x2F;blog&#x2F;swift-linux-port&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;swift.org&#x2F;blog&#x2F;swift-linux-port&#x2F;</a> I would like to see how swift could run on Linux ARM devices (Raspberry Pi 2&#x2F;Beagleboard&#x2F;etc) and other platforms; given that the runtime is already on iOS devices. Kudos to Apple for open-sourcing Swift.

I forsee Swift has a long future on the server-side.That will surely be taking up some of the dev&#x27;t that would otherwise be done in Go.

swift doesn&#x27;t appear to have a story on backend, that&#x27;s why you can&#x27;t google anything. there&#x27;s nothing there.

I can&#x27;t comment on Swift as I&#x27;ve not used it but I can say that Go is more than just a language. It&#x27;s the embodiment of Google&#x27;s experience running large engineering teams. So many of the decisions in Go--its simplicity, the formatter, the opinionated directory structure, static linking, no special build tools--make life a lot easier for teams. Again, I haven&#x27;t used Swift, but I don&#x27;t get the sense that this was one of its design priorities. I&#x27;ve been wrong before though :)

Somebody compare and contrast swift for backend development with golang, node, etc.  Google is giving me nothing useful.

Why be your career on just one language? Shouldn&#x27;t be such an issue to pick up new skills otherwise you become obsolete.

It does actually work like that, for me. I&#x27;m in my mid thirties and have worked in financial software development for over a decade. Given the day rate I&#x27;m earning for Scala development, I will be able to retire comfortably long before Scala goes out of fashion.Of course, I&#x27;ll still be coding for fun after I&#x27;ve retired, so I&#x27;m looking forward to learning Swift in my spare time, alongside the other languages I code regularly in.

It doesn&#x27;t work like that, you can&#x27;t &quot;bet your career&quot; on a language. Either you are interested in continuous learning or you aren&#x27;t, and it&#x27;s pretty clear which one is a better choice when choosing between multiple employee candidates.

Such good news. I&#x27;ve bet my career on Scala, but Swift is sufficiently similar in style that it will be an easy transition.A language to write native (not VM-based) apps for the desktop, iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, CarPlay and Apple TV is becoming very compelling indeed.

There&#x27;s room for plenty of things that I don&#x27;t care about. I don&#x27;t care about open source software that is still controlled by Apple.

Arguing about &quot;the point&quot; misses the point. There&#x27;s plenty of room for both free software and open source software.

<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gnu.org&#x2F;philosophy&#x2F;open-source-misses-the-point.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gnu.org&#x2F;philosophy&#x2F;open-source-misses-the-point....</a>

You can do this with rust and go already by cross compiling which they both make easier than C++ makes it.

I completely agree. I want to be able to write the core of an application once, and then add on a UI for every platform I deploy it on (Windows, OS X, Linux, iOS, Android, etc.). Currently, the only real options for doing this are C&#x2F;C++, and that&#x27;s just no fun to do.I&#x27;d love to have a higher level like Swift that can be easily ported between platforms and connected to whatever development language&#x2F;environment that is commonly used on that platform.I&#x27;m hoping that open sourcing Swift will allow something like this to happen. It seems like Microsoft is already making moves toward making Swift interoperable with .NET as a way of making it easier iOS developers to release Windows phone apps, so I&#x27;m optimistic.

&gt; It could become a serious Javascript competitor due to its elegant syntax, the type safety and speedParticularly in combination with Web Assembly. I wouldn&#x27;t be surprised if there is already an LLVM bitcode &gt; WASL compiler in progress.

Great news! Coding in Swift is fantastic and I would love to see it coming to more platforms, maybe even on servers. It could become a serious Javascript competitor due to its elegant syntax, the type safety and speed.

No doubt JetBrains will step up to the mark.They already have support for swift in AppCode, but surely a community edition &quot;SwiftStudio&quot; can&#x27;t be too much to wish for.It worked wonders for Android development outside of Eclipse.

Now that swift is opensource i&#x27;m looking forward to some better tools being released for it. Right now xcodes support of swift is pretty lacking. No refactoring, and compile errors are fairly ambiguous sometimes.Since this has linux support i wonder if xcode or something similar will be ported to linux.

Not loading for me. Anyone experiencing the same issue?

So because Apple did some things one way 8 years ago, they need to do it exactly the same today or someone screwed up?  Really???  Nothing changes in the modern world?

Why would this at all be interesting?Good grief, not everything is some mysterious conspiracy or some such nonsense.

Interesting that this domain is registered at GoDaddy via DomainsByProxy, and hosted on a SoftLayer IP block.WebKit.org, for instance, is registered with CSC Corporate Domains the same as apple.com, and is hosted on an Apple-owned IP block.Perhaps a (further) indication this isn&#x27;t ready for prime time yet?

Repositories starting to go public now on Github - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple</a>

Congrats to Chris Lattner and the others at Apple who were promoting this! I&#x27;ve been watching Swift develop from the initial announcement because it would be a bit like C#. A great backend language that gives you first-class access on one of the most popular platforms.

I love it. I&#x27;ve never taken a compiler class so going through and reading all the commits since day one is really fascinating. It&#x27;s easy to see exactly how the language and structure of the code base came to be. Super cool in my book.

<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift&#x2F;commit&#x2F;afc81c1855bf711315b8e5de02db138d3d487eeb#commitcomment-14769143" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift&#x2F;commit&#x2F;afc81c1855bf711315b8e5...</a>

Here are some visual aids that better shows how this project has evolved. It also shows how active things are today.<a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;imgur.com&#x2F;a&#x2F;HyQWv" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;imgur.com&#x2F;a&#x2F;HyQWv</a>

It&#x27;s really interesting that they decided to retain the full history! It also gives away some information about the initial contributors and the timeframe of when they started.

Look carefully at that copyright date: 2014-2015. They&#x27;ve rewritten history.

First page of commits if you&#x27;d like to see how the codebase iterated. Find it quite fascinating personally.<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift&#x2F;commits&#x2F;master?page=819" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift&#x2F;commits&#x2F;master?page=819</a>

It&#x27;s also interesting that Lattner joined Github only in October.

It&#x27;s cool to see that it was basically all Lattner at the beginning and his decisions about the license&#x2F;exception still stand.EDIT: License&#x2F;Header in each of files were apparently retroactively added.

They just made public the repo with the guidelines for Swift&#x27;s evolution process: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift-evolution&#x2F;blob&#x2F;master&#x2F;process.md" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift-evolution&#x2F;blob&#x2F;master&#x2F;process...</a>

Probably because they will want to use radar for bugs and general discussion might be done like Linux mailing lists.Edit yeah. that&#x27;s basically how they are handling it but with the exception that they are using a public jira instance for language bugs, radar for xcode and nda bound bugs and a mailing list for general discussion.

Interesting there is no link to add issues to those repositories !

I think it&#x27;s because they need a repo before they can start collaborating, so it&#x27;s best to set it up ASAP to allow people to start pushing code. In my opinion it also helps to set up the initial repo right away so you can benefit from version control features and be in the mindset of making proper commits instead of a huge initial commit that appears out of thin air.

Lexer.cpp:
 int X;Interesting that they started with git, instead of even a very small section of working code first

It&#x27;s also interesting to see the graph of contributors (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift&#x2F;graphs&#x2F;contributors" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift&#x2F;graphs&#x2F;contributors</a>). I noticed for example that Slava Pestov (The creator of the Factor programming language) has made a number of commits. Apple has hired some really smart people to work on Swift!Edit: Also jckarter the creator of the Clay programming language is in there too!

Github repo is live now. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift</a>First ever commit found here <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift&#x2F;commit&#x2F;afc81c1855bf711315b8e5de02db138d3d487eeb" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift&#x2F;commit&#x2F;afc81c1855bf711315b8e5...</a>

Interesting, the compiler seems to be implemented in C++.

Linux support for ObjC is great on the compiler side (GCC supports the full language), but none of the core libraries are available. You can get some stuff (NSString, NSDictionary and so on) through GNUstep, but last I checked it was an uphill battle to be truly productive with ObjC on Linux.

I&#x27;m glad they didn&#x27;t write it in Objective-C, as this would probably make compilation on Linux much harder (I have no idea what the state of Linux support for Objective-C is). As for writing it in Swift itself, that&#x27;s not possible until Swift is sufficiently stable and with enough library support. Which it may or may not have now, but certainly didn&#x27;t have when they started ;)

That is probably the answer. But to be fair there is no one that knows Swift better than Chris Lattner.

Chris Lattner who created Swift wrote LLVM in C++, so it is probably easier to work with and he know C++ very well.

&gt; of course it is not possible to write a Swift compiler in Swift before the language existsNo, but you can do a self-hosting port after you have a first rudimentary compiler. Many compilers have been built like this. Some did it early in language development with a purpouse built one-off bootstrapping compiler, some did it after the language was somewhat stable (eg Go).ObWP: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Bootstrapping_%28compilers%29" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Bootstrapping_%28compilers%29</a>

Objective-C bridges to and from Swift easily, so it would be easily to incrementally replace Objective-C code with Swift code. Since C++ doesn&#x27;t interact with Swift at all, it would either have to be wrapped in C&#x2F;Objective-C, or the entire compiler would need to be rewritten at once.That being said, C++ is probably a better choice, because dynamic dispatch sucks and there&#x27;s better platform support.

Why would Apple write a Swift compiler in Objective-C, a language that it is in the process of phasing out in favor if Swift?And of course it is not possible to write a Swift compiler in Swift before the language exists.So no, not odd at all. Quite logical actually.

Not to mention, bootstrapping in a language that&#x27;s not stable yet can be.... quite a pain.

It is not odd for anyone with background in compiler development.By using C++ they could ramp up the compiler much faster and rely all improvements done to LLVM.Eventually if the language succeeds in the market at large, they can decide to bootstrap it.Although I am a fan of bootstrapping, I also see a good value to expend development resources elsewhere until a language reaches wider adoption.

Lattner directly addresses this in a FAQ in the repository[1]
&quot;Do you plan to rewrite the Swift compiler in Swift?Not in the short term. C++ is a very pragmatic language for implementing compilers, since it has good performance characteristics and allows higher-level programming idioms than C.That said, we do expect Swift to a better language than C++ in a number of ways, so why don&#x27;t we implement the compiler itself in Swift? There are a couple of reasons that bootstrapping is not a good idea, at least in the short term:This complicates bringup of the compiler, because you have to move both the compiled language and the compiler at the same time as the language evolves.
We want the language evolution and direction to be driven by general purpose programming challenges, not by the specific needs of compiler hackers. The urge to &quot;scratch our own itch&quot; might be too great.
That said, we are writing the runtime library in Swift itself. We may also decide to rewrite the compiler in Swift sometime in the distant future when the language settles down. At that point, it may be a good opportunity to revisit previous (internal to the compiler) design decisions, and we do expect and hope Swift to be a great language for doing many things, including implementing compilers.&quot;1. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift&#x2F;blob&#x2F;master&#x2F;www&#x2F;FAQ.rst" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift&#x2F;blob&#x2F;master&#x2F;www&#x2F;FAQ.rst</a>

Because it is based on LLVM and the main LLVM API is C++ based. And no other language has good C++ interoperation.Yes other languages have LLVM bindings, but they aren&#x27;t as comprehensive as actually linking to the LLVM C++ API.Source: Have written a (toy-ish) compiler with LLVM

Am I the only one who finds it odd that while pushing two high level but performant languages (Objective-C and Swift) Apple wrote their Swift compiler in C++?

One of the biggest things for me is that now I can draw upon the knowledge and knowhow of the people making Swift itself. Coming from Java, I&#x27;m used to reading the sources of all the things and now I can finally do it. So exciting, congrats to everyone involved!

And I would never want to work for you if you&#x27;ve such a dearth of humor :PExactly how is this inappropriate?

I likely agree with your sentiment, but I&#x27;m afraid I&#x27;m too ignorant to even realize there is any attempt at a joke. For my understanding of the culture, would someone mind explaining?

I wouldn&#x27;t want to work for a company that cannot take a joke. The PR was sent around apple software engineering today and they got a kick out of it.

No. This is a childish joke, and inappropriate. As a community of professionals, we should do everything we can to discourage this kind of crap.Joe Cumbo (mooman219), I hope you never apply for a job I&#x27;m the hiring manager for, because I would never hire you after seeing this kind of unprofessionalism in your Github profile.

Well i&#x27;m by far not an expert. But a lot of people consider that GPL is an open but maybe too restrictive licence.Notably, &quot;derived works&quot; using GPL copylefted code must be redistributed under same licence. So basicaly if you consider that Swift is a key component of OSX... This is just not something Apple can accept right now.Beside I&#x27;m not even sure a Licence switch from Apache2 is possible without consent of all contributors. And most definitively a Licence switch can in no way be decided via a Pull Request :PFeel free to correct me if I missed a point ;)

I don&#x27;t get it, can you explain? I don&#x27;t know much about licensing...

We detached this subthread from <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=10670577" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=10670577</a> and marked it off-topic.

I see this as an hilarious welcome joke from the community : <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift&#x2F;pull&#x2F;17" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift&#x2F;pull&#x2F;17</a>Its developer&#x27;s way to say FIRST

nodejs, ruby and python have had this for a while.

Very nice that you can debug functions in the repl and set breakpoints:<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;swift.org&#x2F;lldb&#x2F;#why-combine-the-repl-and-debugger" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;swift.org&#x2F;lldb&#x2F;#why-combine-the-repl-and-debugger</a>I don&#x27;t know any other repl that can do that. I know you can debug in (some) lisps and smalltalk, but I don&#x27;t know if you can set breakpoints too. Still a nice and welcome feature.

I actually read this PR as trolling against GPL folks, in the vein of making fun of their license of choice. Seeing that people have also thought differently, it would perhaps be better not to blame a group at all.

FLOSS gotta FLOSS. I&#x27;d be surprised if they didn&#x27;t open a pull request to change the license.

Yeah, and memes are tiring, but lots of people clearly enjoy them.I really enjoy Github as a technology platform. As a social network, not so much.

Apple seems to think so, which is why all their GNU tools are frozen at their GPLv2 versions.

In all seriousness, I&#x27;m not sure they could switch it to GPLv3. I think that Apple&#x27;s firmware signing might run afoul of the anti-tivoization clause and prevent them from shipping Swift on Macs. IANAL

Whenever I pictured the kind of person who posted reaction gifs to a thread, I imagined some 14 year old kid trying to be cool.Now, seeing this on github, I can only spend a few minutes clicking on the gif-poster&#x27;s names and taking a glance at their code to see if they are actually mentally retarded or 14, and leave mystified and horrified.

&gt; I used to hold scientists and programmers to a different standard than most normal people, because it seemed like a certain level of advanced understanding was necessary to build anything functional in those fields.This is a dangerous and wrong idea.

&gt; I used to hold scientists and programmers to a different standard than most normal people, because it seemed like a certain level of advanced understanding was necessary to build anything functional in those fields.I think you need to reevaluate the standards to which you hold people you know nothing about. GitHub is a free platform that anyone can post on, regardless of academic pedigree. Further, having specialized knowledge and being a troll are not mutually exclusive qualities. The humor of early hacker culture may have been more witty but it was nonetheless a means for programmers to take themselves less seriously [1].&gt; It feels like seeing a ghost. I&#x27;m embarrassed to be registered with GitHub, and also to be human.Maybe that&#x27;s a sign you should get over yourself.[1] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.catb.org&#x2F;jargon&#x2F;html&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.catb.org&#x2F;jargon&#x2F;html&#x2F;</a>

This is a serious question: what about enjoying memes, and humor in general, indicates a lack of &quot;special ability&quot;?I won&#x27;t disagree that the stuff people have posted in that issue isn&#x27;t funny. But honestly, I&#x27;d rather see that kind of thing than live in a world where people feel the need to treat everything (or even all technical things) seriously. There&#x27;s enough darkness in the world without imposing more on ourselves.

That issue changed my view of GitHub, and related things. I&#x27;d seen a few animated gifs in other threads this past week, but it didn&#x27;t really sink in until this.I used to hold scientists and programmers to a different standard than most normal people, because it seemed like a certain level of advanced understanding was necessary to build anything functional in those fields. But I&#x27;ve since realized that special ability does not carry over into all areas of life.It feels like seeing a ghost. I&#x27;m embarrassed to be registered with GitHub, and also to be human.

What kind of trolling is that ?&gt;I think we should use GPL v3 instead.<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift&#x2F;pull&#x2F;17" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift&#x2F;pull&#x2F;17</a>

<a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;downforeveryoneorjustme.com&#x2F;swift.org" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;downforeveryoneorjustme.com&#x2F;swift.org</a>It&#x27;s not just you! <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;swift.org" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;swift.org</a> looks down from here.

Yes it&#x27;s a nice language. Now it just needs the libs for Linux servers.

OK, that it&#x27;s the preferred (by Apple) language&#x2F;platform for iOS development? I&#x27;m guessing you knew what I meant.

It isn&#x27;t necessary for iOS. It&#x27;s still possible to write every part of an app in only Objective-C, as there are no Swift-only APIs. AFAIK, there are no indications of that changing any time soon.

Would anyone use Swift if it wasn&#x27;t necessary for iOS?

In what way does Go scale badly from an engineering point of view?

For android, we already have kotlin (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;kotlinlang.org&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;kotlinlang.org&#x2F;</a>), which is very similar to Swift and has 100% interoperability with java.

&quot;learning&#x2F;mastering both Go and Swift is the best decision you can make&quot; is a very bold claim.In my area we use Go for some systems but found it scales badly from an engineering point of view to larger more complicated systems, compared to languages like Java and Scala. The JVM has much more mature tooling and libraries too.For mobile applications it will be a while until Swift is stable on Android, so some of the cross platform languages would be a good choice. React Native, Unity, Unreal for example.

The programming language eco system is really improving rapidly and efficiently. It seemed the developer&#x27;s toolkit was limited by the languages created 20+ years ago but within the last few years we&#x27;re seeing a renaissance in developer toolkits as well as development philosophies.Languages like Go, Rust, and now Swift are not only great from almost every aspect over the last generation languages like C, C++, Java, but a lot noobs or scripting language developers are also converting to more low level languages. So the barrier to pick up a lower level language and become productive in it has really diminished.Go has had a head start and introduced minimal simplicity. It&#x27;s a great&#x2F;powerful language and almost everybody can pick it up quickly within a few days. I wouldn&#x27;t listen to people who dismiss the language for its lack of &quot;features&quot; and have never written more than &quot;hello world&quot; in it.Swift is &quot;important&quot; because of Apple &amp; iOS. It has a much steeper learning curve than Go and naturally it takes a few weeks of dedication to get comfortable with it. However, once you overcome the introductory challenge then you&#x27;ll start to appreciate the language and its capabilities.Already the job market for both languages are really high with higher than average salaries. So learning&#x2F;mastering both Go and Swift is the best decision you can make.

Thanks for the link.I think, the function type :(Int, Int) -&gt; Intmay have been the main reason, but having(Int, Int) : Intfunc nameMe(name: String, calName: ((Int, Int) : Int))would still have worked, and made the syntax more aesthetic.

You might find this handy: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;fuckingswiftblocksyntax.com&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;fuckingswiftblocksyntax.com&#x2F;</a>

I was thinking more about Types herevar name : Stringfunc nameMe(name: String) : String

The functional mapping also makes sense. Thanks for the pointer.

It seems pretty consistent with functions in a set-notation sense, with functions that map a tuple of stuff to something else. The mapping being indicated by an arrow instead of a colon.

Rust is using similar declaration: fn hello(name: str) -&gt; str { }

What was the design decision that required function declaration to be :func hello(name: String) -&gt; String { }rather than,func hello(name: String) : String { }

It&#x27;s really great to see Apple investing in package management for Swift. Handling dependencies and versioning well is so important for a language to get right out of the gate.

Now I feel better about my past rejections that were based on such stuff.

I&#x27;ve read blog post on qualified developers being rejected by Apple as well. Last was one was by Furrow.

I think it&#x27;s fine to take it personal, just don&#x27;t take it out on yourself. Daniel Ek, founder of Spotify, is another Google reject.

Fully agree. I seriously don&#x27;t understand the statistical illiteracy[1] that drives people to take every instance of a (perceived) false positive or false negative as a sign of an entire system&#x27;s unsuitability. I guess a lot of people just have problems with the concept of a counterfactual. Note that this doesn&#x27;t apply to people&#x27;s reactions to their _own_ experiences, since it&#x27;s completely reasonable to have a bit of an emotional reaction to something like getting rejected.[1] I couldn&#x27;t think of a better way to put this, but it&#x27;s not quite the right term, since you don&#x27;t need any education in statistics to understand how irrational these reactions are.

Highly qualified people get rejected by google&#x27;s interview process all the time, so people shouldn&#x27;t take it personally if they get rejected. google is willing to miss out on good people occasionally because they believe they can&#x27;t fix the problem w&#x2F;o mistakenly hiring more mediocre&#x2F;bad people.

I still remember max howel tweet[1] in which he publicly said that we was rejected by Google. Looking at his linkedin profile[2] , he was later hired by Apple in August 2015. Now he is biggest[3] contributed to Swift package manager. It is good to see that the person who has lot of experience in handing Apple and package system is handing this stuff. I guess, things happens for good.[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;mxcl&#x2F;status&#x2F;608682016205344768" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;mxcl&#x2F;status&#x2F;608682016205344768</a>[2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.linkedin.com&#x2F;in&#x2F;maxhowell" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.linkedin.com&#x2F;in&#x2F;maxhowell</a>[3] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift-package-manager&#x2F;graphs&#x2F;contributors" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;apple&#x2F;swift-package-manager&#x2F;graphs&#x2F;contri...</a>

Swift is Open Source