@jaredsinclair @mjtsai @curtclifton @owensd Like I said, Swift's defaults won't change how ObjC works or even the policy of new frameworks.
-
-
@jckarter@mjtsai@curtclifton What about when Apple writes a framework in Swift? Will it remain swizzlable, probably for use from Obj-C?0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
@roopeshchander@mjtsai@curtclifton That's a call API review can make when it happens.0 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
@roopeshchander@mjtsai@curtclifton The goal of the resilience defaults is to avoid developers making irrevocable promises they can't keep.0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
@roopeshchander@mjtsai@curtclifton Being too final or too static is a mistake you can safely fix, but not the other way.0 replies 3 retweets 2 likes -
@jckarter@mjtsai@curtclifton I see your point. A default final is a different issue from future Apple frameworks being un-overrideable.0 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
@jckarter@mjtsai@curtclifton Coz, it’s not like Apple can’t add final to all public API even if it’s not a language default. :)0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
@roopeshchander@jckarter@curtclifton the realities of developing apps are not appreciated/understood. Old system was accidentally good.0 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
@roopeshchander@jckarter@curtclifton Or the thinking behind it was forgotten.0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
@mjtsai@roopeshchander@curtclifton We won't take subclassing or dynamic away. Stronger guarantees allow for new design choices.0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
@jckarter @roopeshchander @curtclifton Making dynamic not the default means it's effectively already taken away in many cases.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
Joe Groff
Roopesh Chander
Michael Tsai