David has articulated what I couldn't quite put my finger on, and I agree. This also comes around to something I probably missed elsewhere in the discussion- but is the proposal to make NS classes just look like thus don't have NS in Swift? Or is it to write Swift versions of those classes that duplicate the functionality of those classes in Swift (for instance, giving String the full interface of NSString without actually having it call into NSString obj-c code?). I tried glancing through the discussion and couldn't really find an answer to this (though I did it quickly, so my apologies if this is an obvious question that has already been answered). Best Josh
Sent from my iPhone On May 8, 2016, at 00:41, David Waite via swift-evolution <swift-evolution@swift.org<mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org>> wrote: It's not a goal to rewrite Foundation from scratch in Swift. All Swift apps that are running out there today are in fact using a combination of Swift, Objective-C, C, C++, various flavors of assembly, and more. The goal is to present the existing API of Foundation in a way that fits in with the language today while allowing us to iteratively improve it over time. Perhaps my concern is a higher level - I don't understand where Foundation is envisioned going. From my perspective, Foundation is highly coupled to Apple platforms and Objective-C on one side, and part of the Swift standard library on the other. Perhaps long-term Foundation should be split into two new things - a core library for cross-platform swift development, and the infrastructure for Objective-C interoperability on apple platforms only. -DW _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org<mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
