[swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0117: Default classes to be non-subclassable publicly
rparada at mac.com
Mon Jul 11 14:03:40 CDT 2016
WebObjects is one of the frameworks I was referring to without actually naming it.
After Apple stopped supporting WebObjects we have been able to fix, extend and enhance it all these years and has served us really well. It is an awesome framework. I really wish that Swift had a framework like it. But Swift's limited reflection is lacking and is crucial for implementing a framework like WebObjects.
Had WebObjects been designed with sealed classes, our hands would have been tied for all the many apps and systems that use it.
I am hoping that if this proposal gets approved that libraries such as these get designed as subclassable. That to me is much more valuable, at least for these types of libraries.
I think that in the long term libraries will sort themselves out. A well designed subclassable library will have more value.
> On Jul 11, 2016, at 12:49 PM, L. Mihalkovic via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> (From mobile)
>> On Jul 11, 2016, at 12:53 PM, Tino Heth <2th at gmx.de> wrote:
>>> You do realize that then itunes store used to (i don't know hese days) for many years run on java, despite objc being such a more advanced environment. ;-)
>> well, from my experience, app developers are running circles around the itunes store all the time ;-)
> Better yet... I once had lunch with the now defunct java team and the guy who did the java rewrite of webobjects... can you guess from what language? or why they had to do it?
> Still running circles?
> Cheers & thank u for the smiles...
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
More information about the swift-evolution