maxdesiatov

Joined 10 years ago

Karma

553

Submissions

48

Member since

Jan 9

View on Hacker News

Recent submissions

Emscripten Target Support for Swift forums.swift.org

2 maxdesiatov 7 months ago 0 comments

Swift SDKs for WebAssembly now available on swift.org forums.swift.org

6 maxdesiatov 1 year ago 0 comments

Structured concurrency in Swift: continuations, tasks, and cancellation desiatov.com

3 maxdesiatov 5 years ago 0 comments

Yet another macOS privacy protections bypass lapcatsoftware.com

320 maxdesiatov 6 years ago 90 comments

First stable release of SwiftWasm 5.3 is now available forums.swift.org

3 maxdesiatov 6 years ago 0 comments

Interactive Swift Playground Built with WebAssembly swiftwasm-pad.netlify.app

4 maxdesiatov 6 years ago 0 comments

The State of Swift for WebAssembly in 2020 desiatov.com

2 maxdesiatov 6 years ago 0 comments

Open-source implementation of Apple's Combine framework github.com

1 maxdesiatov 7 years ago 0 comments

Comment · 7 years ago

Show HN: Tokamak – React-like framework for native UI written in pure Swift github.com

8 maxdesiatov 7 years ago 0 comments

Swift and React Native (and Similar Libraries/Frameworks) Survey

3 maxdesiatov 7 years ago 1 comments

Comment · 7 years ago

Sorry, I'm not sure I understand this point. Why would I need a different license for this from scratch implementation? What if I want Apache 2.0 as well?

Also, I'm convinced that many many people do have interest in this. Many people were interested in GCC existing in parallel with whatever other compilers were available. Heck, Chris Lattner's Clang wouldn't exist if C and C++ were "protected with patents from patent trolls". Are you saying that all these alternative compilers were a total waste of time?

Comment · 7 years ago

but what about reimplementing a compiler from scratch without reusing any of Apple's code? It wouldn't fall under a definition of Derivative Work under terms of Apache 2.0 then

Comment · 7 years ago

And also, "it protects Swift" in their context always means "it protects Apple's Swift" unfortunately

Comment · 7 years ago

Exactly this, thank you for summarizing this so well! I've tried to clarify this exact point at Swift Forums, but I haven't seen even a clarifying answer from anyone in the core team on this point. Everyone says "it protects Swift", but looks like this protection comes at a cost of the overall ecosystem.