<p dir="ltr">At what point would you consider the Linux product to be viable for production server side application development. Do you think that goal has been achieved in swift 3.0. Or is it going to have to wait for the ABI lock down. </p>
<p dir="ltr">I'm weighting the wisdom of possibly using Swift on linux for microservices, we are comming from a modernPHP and OOP environment, and many of the alternatives such as go and rust have higher impedance mismatches than swift, given the skills I have available in the organisation. </p>
<p dir="ltr">I'm interested in cross platform app development down the line, but for now, I'm only really interested in building out APIs with it. </p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 17 May 2016 02:14, "Chris Lattner via swift-evolution" <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On May 16, 2016, at 10:38 AM, Goffredo Marocchi <<a href="mailto:panajev@gmail.com">panajev@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> Quite sad we could not get into ABI stability for Swift 3... but are we talking Swift 3.1 or 4.0?<br>
<br>
We’ll start discussing post-3.0 releases in August. Until Swift 3 is really wound down, it is almost impossible to make forward looking plans.<br>
<br>
-Chris<br>
<br>
><br>
> Sent from my iPhone<br>
><br>
>> On 16 May 2016, at 17:43, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>>> On May 16, 2016, at 9:29 AM, David Sweeris <<a href="mailto:davesweeris@mac.com">davesweeris@mac.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>>> On May 16, 2016, at 10:18 AM, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> That said, it is also clear at this point that some of the loftier goals that we started out with aren’t going to fit into the release - including some of the most important generics features needed in order to lock down the ABI of the standard library. As such, the generics and ABI stability goals will roll into a future release of Swift, where I expect them to be the *highest* priority features to get done.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Oh, good! I was getting worried about that. Are there any particular topics that we should drop or discuss?<br>
>><br>
>> The highest priority to me is to get the “little syntactic stuff” done that we want to nail down because it affects source stability. A recent thing that came up was @noescape -> @nonescaping and whether to make it the default, for example.<br>
>><br>
>> As for dropping, it is pretty clear that we are out of time for large-scope additions.<br>
>><br>
>> -Chris<br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> swift-evolution mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org">swift-evolution@swift.org</a><br>
>> <a href="https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution</a><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
swift-evolution mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org">swift-evolution@swift.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution</a><br>
</blockquote></div>