Are Applications/Software going to Improve or Disimprove with new ARM Architecture?

[jdb8167]

I think they were rather clear that it’s a new continuation-aware executor, not GDC. They explicitly mentioned some issues with GDC (like thread explosion) that the new framework solves. They also mentioned things like hopping continuations between threads to improve utilization of multiple CPU cores. The system sounds very sophisticated actually.

Interesting. I’ll have to watch the WWDC videos.

 

[jdb8167]

I now code mostly in swift, but it certainly makes my eyes bleed much more than Objective C. Lots of hard-to-remember syntax that is even harder to read.

All the syntax shortcuts drive me crazy. Programmers that hate typing ugh.

 

[Shirasaki]

Hopefully we'll also be returning to an era where software was more portable and able to be used across different chips and architectures.

Yeah. No one likes to return to 1980 era where computers are just incompatible with each other, even different generation of computers manufactured by the same company.

 

[Shirasaki]

Mojave was the last build that could run 32-bit apps

Make it High Sierra cause at least that version wont jump out at you every once in a while telling “your app will not be able to run in the next release”.

 

[cmaier]

All the syntax shortcuts drive me crazy. Programmers that hate typing ugh.

Meanwhile they decided ++ is too hard to understand.

 

[poorcody]

All the syntax shortcuts drive me crazy. Programmers that hate typing ugh.

Tell me about it. Swift seems to "borrowing" a lot of things from C# (a great language to copy IMHO), but boy, do they love compressing functionality. Sometimes it feels like they are just trying to show-off how smart they can make compilers. I mean, it's fun to make 20 lines of code into one, but not when you're trying to understand or debug it...

 

[leman]

All the syntax shortcuts drive me crazy. Programmers that hate typing ugh.

Dunno, I always thought that Swift is rather straightforward (even though they do have a lot of annotations). I find it mich easier to deal with than say, C++ with its crazy semantics and arbitrary rules.

C is often a better choice if I have to deal with low-level pointe-heavy stuff, but the lack of typing and abstractions hurst. Not to mention that you always have to watch out for UB… so I often find myself reaching for Zig or Rust on those situations.

 

[cmaier]

Dunno, I always thought that Swift is rather straightforward (even though they do have a lot of annotations). I find it mich easier to deal with than say, C++ with its crazy semantics and arbitrary rules.

C is often a better choice if I have to deal with low-level pointe-heavy stuff, but the lack of typing and abstractions hurst. Not to mention that you always have to watch out for UB… so I often find myself reaching for Zig or Rust on those situations.

Closure syntax is crazy. Multiple trailing closures are crazy. Receiving functions as arguments is insane. Having to test optionals everywhere is ugly. There’s just a lot of ugliness from the people who thought nobody would be able to understand Y = X++.

 

[jdb8167]

Closure syntax is crazy. Multiple trailing closures are crazy. Receiving functions as arguments is insane. Having to test optionals everywhere is ugly. There’s just a lot of ugliness from the people who thought nobody would be able to understand Y = X++.

I like the optionals syntax but I agree with you about closures. The syntax makes me pull my hair out. Completely normal closure semantics but the syntax is inscrutable all for the reason to reduce the amount of typing on a keyboard and I guess compact source files. I keep hoping that my brain might finally just “get it” but so far, I’m not doing great at it.

 

[cmaier]

I like the optionals syntax but I agree with you about closures. The syntax makes me pull my hair out. Completely normal closure semantics but the syntax is inscrutable all for the reason to reduce the amount of typing on a keyboard and I guess compact source files. I keep hoping that my brain might finally just “get it” but so far, I’m not doing great at it.

I literally compare optionals to nil to avoid creating a local scope variable of the same name half the time because it hurts my brain.

 

[JMacHack]

After reading the responses I take back what I said.

 

[leman]

Closure syntax is crazy. Multiple trailing closures are crazy. Receiving functions as arguments is insane. Having to test optionals everywhere is ugly. There’s just a lot of ugliness from the people who thought nobody would be able to understand Y = X++.

Yeah, Swift closure syntax is a bit special. I think they got it from the "let ... in ..." expression from the ML family, but I agree that it wasn't the best choice. I also dislike the metatype syntax — I tried to appeal these things early in the Swift development process but the core team has already made their choices.

The rest is quite neat though IMO. Not really sure what kind of problem you have with optionals, guards and optional chaining in Swift make working with them quite elegant, especially compared to Rust. And I really like Swift error handling, I think it's among the best on the market right now.

 

[09872738]

Speaking of I need to hone my Swift skills once again. Too much C and Python lately…
Liked the Objective-C / Smalltalk syntax though. Required a bit of getting used to, but liked it a lot

[[object alloc ] init] <== ‘ts a classic

 

[Krevnik]

The rest is quite neat though IMO. Not really sure what kind of problem you have with optionals, guards and optional chaining in Swift make working with them quite elegant, especially compared to Rust. And I really like Swift error handling, I think it's among the best on the market right now.

I wonder how much of it is from having to interact with Obj-C APIs where there's a lot more optionals than in "Pure Swift" code. Especially if the implicitly unwrapped optional stuff feels like a bad code smell to you (it does to me). But optionals certainly took me a bit of time to adjust to.

My CLI/Linux Swift projects use few optionals, and so optionals feel right when they do get used. My AppKit/UIKit projects wind up having a ton of optionals in UI code and Core Data code, so it really does help to have a set of guidelines on how to use the myriad of tools for optionals to keep code readable, and to understand where implicitly unwrapped optionals make the most sense.

That said, I'll definitely take Swift's error mechanism over C++-style exception handling any day of the week.

And yeah, I try to specifically avoid a good chunk of the closure syntax Swift provides in favor of a more cut-down version. SwiftUI makes that a bit more difficult.

 

[Tech198]

Seems like Arm opened a new world when it comes to computing with Mac, what do you think about the future of software and applications?

The bar raises higher. Just like sports, some will make it (...others, maybe not ((majority perhaps???)

I see this:

- free app developers:- not going there/lack of developers/profit... The reason why Mozilla, and Google could because they have a vast community of developers.. to keep development going. and cost is derived from other means.

...And of course, paid software will most likely be there because you have support. Payed users will be the benefit of getting M1 support sooner.... not always.

Free apps. may be there to, but don't except a miracle. i don't except 95% nor even 80% free