> Yes, it's Apple's strategy but I maintain that from a tech perspective it's a very weak one.
Gotcha. I disagree, but I think that's ok.
> Cryptography DX is always terrible on every platform, I don't know why,
Let's encrypt is a pretty good example of how simple it can be. The experience of codesigning + notarisation as a developer is poor. If you want to use the GUI and are working from xcode templates, it's fine, but apart from that, you're into glueing together forum posts running binaries and tools with no logs that report success with arbitrary delays that work on your local device but not on other devices.
> Swift is a good upgrade, but not exactly a high level managed language. Most of those languages have very fast or non-existent compile times as well as GC, they tend to be simple-ish, perhaps they have optional types. The Swift DX is quite different to a C# or a Java for example.
Swift has ARC, fast compile times, and a _very_ high level interface to the underlying API's. I think it's very comparable to C# on windows for many, many things.
Gotcha. I disagree, but I think that's ok.
> Cryptography DX is always terrible on every platform, I don't know why,
Let's encrypt is a pretty good example of how simple it can be. The experience of codesigning + notarisation as a developer is poor. If you want to use the GUI and are working from xcode templates, it's fine, but apart from that, you're into glueing together forum posts running binaries and tools with no logs that report success with arbitrary delays that work on your local device but not on other devices.
> Swift is a good upgrade, but not exactly a high level managed language. Most of those languages have very fast or non-existent compile times as well as GC, they tend to be simple-ish, perhaps they have optional types. The Swift DX is quite different to a C# or a Java for example.
Swift has ARC, fast compile times, and a _very_ high level interface to the underlying API's. I think it's very comparable to C# on windows for many, many things.