On Wednesday, 15 February 2017 at 16:41:31 UTC, bpr wrote:
Swift took over quickly because Apple has mandated it. While I'm happy about that, there's no denying that Swift wouldn't be where it is without the weight of Apple behind it. I'd go as far as to say that Swift's success is assured (unless Apple
It may have been assured, but the adoption _rate_ comes from having a good match on semantics and existing practices.
Replace Swift with Haskell and the adoption would have been much slower.
As a PL, Swift looks nice, but they'll have to come up with a more complete story around concurrency.
Do you mean parallell execution (CPU) or concurrency as a modelling paradigm? One cannot really assume that Apple hardware has more than 2 CPUs. So as a starting point you can presume that one core taken by the main UI event loop and the other one taken by real time code. Whatever is left is for Apple's "Operation Queues" (dispatch queues, basically worker threads working in a FIFO manner IIRC).
https://developer.apple.com/library/content/documentation/General/Conceptual/ConcurrencyProgrammingGuide/
