[swift-evolution] A case for postponing ABI stability

David Scrève david.screve at dlta-studio.com
Fri Jan 27 10:09:11 CST 2017

> > On Jan 27, 2017, at 2:57 AM, Charlie Monroe via swift-evolution<swift-evolution at swift.org(mailto:swift-evolution at swift.org)>wrote:

> > 
> That's right. If the OS frameworks use Swift then either (1) you have to clone the framework stack for each Swift version, or (2) you have only one copy of the frameworks but frameworks and apps can't share their Swift objects or publish Swift API.
> The framework structure that Apple inherited from NeXT supports framework versioning, but *no frameworks use it*. It doesn't scale.
> (NeXT used framework versioning a few times, back when the entire OS only had a handful of frameworks. Today's AppKit and Foundation are version C. libSystem is version B. That's about it.)

	I completely agree with ABI stability goal…I only have a fear regarding some postponed evolutions requests especially Abstract Classes. Would it be still possible ?

David Scrève
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3723 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/attachments/20170127/32aec3fe/attachment.p7s>

More information about the swift-evolution mailing list