<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Hi Tony,<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I’m a bit confused by your answer. I am aware that some Objective-C Foundation and swift-corelibs-foundation classes share a common implementation through CF. My questions were really about the place of swift-corelibs-foundation on OS X and iOS. Can you help me understand?</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><ul class="MailOutline"><li class="">What did you mean by "Technically, swift-corelibs-foundation is only part of the distribution on Linux.”?</li><li class="">Will swift-corelibs-foundation be part of the canonical Swift distribution on OS X and iOS once Swift 3 is released?</li><li class="">What is the name of the swift-corelibs-foundation module on OS X and iOS? SwiftFoundation?</li><li class="">What is the name of the swift-corelibs-foundation module on Linux? Foundation?</li><li class="">If those are different, isn’t there an incentive for having the same moule name on all platforms?</li></ul><div class=""><br class=""></div></div><div class="">David.</div><div class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On 14 May 2016, at 00:44, Tony Parker <<a href="mailto:anthony.parker@apple.com" class="">anthony.parker@apple.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8" class=""><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Hi David,<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Much of the implementation is indeed shared (via the CoreFoundation C code, and the stuff it uses like ICU and libdispatch). Some of it is a reimplementation of the same API, but in Swift.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">If you write code targeting the Foundation API, then you simply ‘import Foundation’. The idea here is that the implementation abstracts away the platform differences including the implementation itself.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">- Tony</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On May 13, 2016, at 3:34 PM, David Hart <<a href="mailto:david@hartbit.com" class="">david@hartbit.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8" class=""><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">After looking into it, I guess it would be available, but under the SwiftFoundation module. Correct? I guess that decision was made so that Swift apps in production built on Foundation don’t break when recompiled under Swift 3? Is it worth converging the names of the module so its the same on all platforms? Isn’t it bad if portable code was doomed to have #if os() for all Foundation imports? If we do rename it, do we rename it to SwiftFoundation on Linux or do we rename it to Foundation on OS X (which would require renaming the Objective-C Foundation to something else and write a migration)?<div class=""><br class=""><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On 14 May 2016, at 00:19, David Hart via swift-corelibs-dev <<a href="mailto:swift-corelibs-dev@swift.org" class="">swift-corelibs-dev@swift.org</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8" class=""><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On 13 May 2016, at 21:50, Tony Parker <<a href="mailto:anthony.parker@apple.com" class="">anthony.parker@apple.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;" class="">Technically, swift-corelibs-foundation is only part of the distribution on Linux. On Darwin platforms, we use a combination of the overlay (stdlib/public/SDK/Foundation directory in the Swift project) and the Foundation.framework that ships on the OS.</span></div></blockquote><br class=""></div><div class="">I’m confused about swift-corelibs-foundation only being part of the Linux distribution. Are you saying that when Swift 3.0 ships, <i class="">import Foundation</i> on OS X and iOS will still import the Objective-C framework? If yes, I’m very surprised, and I think many people will be. One of the goals of swift-corelibs-foundation (README) says:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>• Provide a level of OS independence, to enhance portability.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">How can it be portable if different platforms don’t share the same underlying core libraries?</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">David.</div></div><br class=""></div>_______________________________________________<br class="">swift-corelibs-dev mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:swift-corelibs-dev@swift.org" class="">swift-corelibs-dev@swift.org</a><br class=""><a href="https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-corelibs-dev" class="">https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-corelibs-dev</a><br class=""></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></div></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></div></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></body></html>