Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Yeah, the article's technical analysis is good but I'm not sure what this line was supposed to say: what it actually says is wrong. Swift is definitely intended to replace Objective-C.

Perhaps that line in article meant that it's not binary identical to Objective-C. Swift classes definitely use different method invocation semantics (unless you adorn the class with the @objc attribute).



What I meant by that was, the Objective-C runtime is still needed.


Sure, because Apple wants a transition path for existing code.

The Objective-C runtime takes the role of COM in Mac OS X/iOS.

A binary ABI between OO languages.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: