Swift is the first language I've seen that I think has a real shot at displacing C/C++,
Shake your head and wake up man, you're in the Apple bubble. Swift will never be used much on non-Apple platforms, just like Objective-C before it (which frankly, is also a much nicer language than C or C++).
It's only churn if the changes are going back and forth. There is nothing wrong with improving an API,
Language design is an old, old problem. Parameter ordering consistency is also a well known, old old problem. If you can't get it right the first time, then you have no business designing a language.
How much say did you have over the directions that C and C++ have taken lately? None.
It's the nature of the changes. C++ and C both have heavy commitment to backwards compatibility (your stupid examples to the contrary notwithstanding). Apple has a 3 year commitment to backwards compatibility. They change things for cosmetic reasons.
C++11 altered the "export" keyword's behavior. C++17 removes support for trigraphs.
ok, you convinced me. I'll use C for better compatibility.
That's a reasonable risk/reward position. It's good that the state of the art moves forward, and it's also good that stable not-moving options exist too.
In general the problem is that these languages aren't moving forward. They are just churning. In some cases, the only difference is the order of parameters in a method.
This is why I jumped off the Apple treadmill and stopped using their proprietary languages (yeah, I know the languages are technically open, but for practical purposes the languages change at their whim). When I need to write for iPhone, the meat of the code gets written in C or C++, which is stable (and has the added benefit of being portable to Android or anywhere else).
For the code which I write in Apple's languages, I use a simple subset of the language, trying to avoid features that are likely to be changed in the future. It makes me sad because there are some nice features, but I don't want to use them because the pain of rewriting code (for no reason) is worse than the benefit I get from those features.
The summary is very understandable......I know it's uncomfortable to read the summary, though. Would you like me to copy and past it down in a comment so you don't have to make the effort to scroll up a bit?
That's reasonable......but since you're reasonable, I'll bet you're not complaining that Nestle is charging you a ridiculous markup for water they get very cheaply.
even when they reliably nail the long-term trend for over thirty years.
Except they didn't! Ha!
I'll talk to you again in two years when it's even more obvious that the models are wrong. At some point, it will be so obvious that even people like you will clearly see it.
btw, I hope you learn how to read papers and stop linking to dumb blogs. Until then, you'll never have an original thought.
So paying $3.00 for a bottle of water at an event is a rip-off when you can bring your own bottle of tap-water for nearly nothing from home? I am so surprised.
A worthy point. The difference is that SSH is designed to aid users, whereas DRM is designed to hinder them. One is designed with the purpose of making communication safe, the other is designed to remove all control from the users of the communication.
DRM is not open. You can't have an 'interoperable' DRM standard, because its entire purpose is to stop things from being interoperable.
It's better to force companies to make their own sub-par player (with all the bugs and security flaws that come with it) rather than trying to give them first class status in the browser.
"Did you exchange
a walk on part in the war
for a leading role in a cage?"
Their revenue is pretty impressive, but they've never turned a profit.
Yeah, to really invest money in them, I'd have to look through their books, and figure out what things can be cut. The real question is, "If they decided to cut advertising/promotion/expansion costs, could they turn a profit today?" Amazon rarely turns a profit, but whenever investors get too jittery, like magic, the next quarter Amazon turns a profit.
Slashdot Mirror
By the time your language is released as the premier language for your platform (which Swift is) you better be sure that you got it mostly right.
Swift is the first language I've seen that I think has a real shot at displacing C/C++,
Shake your head and wake up man, you're in the Apple bubble. Swift will never be used much on non-Apple platforms, just like Objective-C before it (which frankly, is also a much nicer language than C or C++).
Any app that is mostly interface is a trash app: here today, forgotten tomorrow.
And if you're skipping most of the new features, then you're not using optionals, closures, enums, and other new features to your advantage.
Oh what a shame.
performSelectorOnMainThread is the one I was thinking of in particular.
Ah, come on phantomfive! You are smarter than that.
Thanks :)
Just because Swift 4 is out, it makes Swift 3 not dead. And as both compile down to ordinary *.o/*.lib/*.so files, they can interlink each other.
How long do you think Swift 3 will be maintained?
It's only churn if the changes are going back and forth. There is nothing wrong with improving an API,
Language design is an old, old problem. Parameter ordering consistency is also a well known, old old problem. If you can't get it right the first time, then you have no business designing a language.
How much say did you have over the directions that C and C++ have taken lately? None.
It's the nature of the changes. C++ and C both have heavy commitment to backwards compatibility (your stupid examples to the contrary notwithstanding). Apple has a 3 year commitment to backwards compatibility. They change things for cosmetic reasons.
C++11 altered the "export" keyword's behavior. C++17 removes support for trigraphs.
ok, you convinced me. I'll use C for better compatibility.
That's a reasonable risk/reward position. It's good that the state of the art moves forward, and it's also good that stable not-moving options exist too.
In general the problem is that these languages aren't moving forward. They are just churning. In some cases, the only difference is the order of parameters in a method.
This is why I jumped off the Apple treadmill and stopped using their proprietary languages (yeah, I know the languages are technically open, but for practical purposes the languages change at their whim). When I need to write for iPhone, the meat of the code gets written in C or C++, which is stable (and has the added benefit of being portable to Android or anywhere else).
For the code which I write in Apple's languages, I use a simple subset of the language, trying to avoid features that are likely to be changed in the future. It makes me sad because there are some nice features, but I don't want to use them because the pain of rewriting code (for no reason) is worse than the benefit I get from those features.
The summary is very understandable......I know it's uncomfortable to read the summary, though. Would you like me to copy and past it down in a comment so you don't have to make the effort to scroll up a bit?
That's reasonable......but since you're reasonable, I'll bet you're not complaining that Nestle is charging you a ridiculous markup for water they get very cheaply.
even when they reliably nail the long-term trend for over thirty years.
Except they didn't! Ha!
I'll talk to you again in two years when it's even more obvious that the models are wrong. At some point, it will be so obvious that even people like you will clearly see it.
btw, I hope you learn how to read papers and stop linking to dumb blogs. Until then, you'll never have an original thought.
So paying $3.00 for a bottle of water at an event is a rip-off when you can bring your own bottle of tap-water for nearly nothing from home? I am so surprised.
Hey, your comment quality is improving! Good job, keep it up!
Because it's 10x better than your empty rebuttal.
You do have a point, but in this context, "an open method to pass non-open DRM modules" is basically not open or free.
If the W3C had not been political, and instead had followed its own procedures, then this standard never would have passed.
The "best stuff on the Internet" isn't movies and TV.
So true.
However the world doesn’t rotate around open source standards.
The world would be a better place if it did.
And there are those of us who want the world to be a better place.
it's a standard way to ask browsers for the non-standard DRM modules the platform offers and how to pass data to them.
Calling that open is bullshit.
the browser is also trying to stay relevant in an app world.
The browser is trying to take over the app world. It doesn't need to be an app VM.
A worthy point. The difference is that SSH is designed to aid users, whereas DRM is designed to hinder them. One is designed with the purpose of making communication safe, the other is designed to remove all control from the users of the communication.
One route would be to find that those cameras were hacked, and were being used as parts of DDOS attacks.
DRM is not open. You can't have an 'interoperable' DRM standard, because its entire purpose is to stop things from being interoperable.
It's better to force companies to make their own sub-par player (with all the bugs and security flaws that come with it) rather than trying to give them first class status in the browser.
"Did you exchange
a walk on part in the war
for a leading role in a cage?"
Their revenue is pretty impressive, but they've never turned a profit.
Yeah, to really invest money in them, I'd have to look through their books, and figure out what things can be cut. The real question is, "If they decided to cut advertising/promotion/expansion costs, could they turn a profit today?" Amazon rarely turns a profit, but whenever investors get too jittery, like magic, the next quarter Amazon turns a profit.