IssueRaiser

It's more than that.

It's more than that. I don't think having non-reference objects is entirely impossible (e.g. Objective-C blocks are already stack-based objects until they are copied), but it doesn't work for Swift's design goals. Objects have to be reference types because Swift needs to interact with Cocoa and Cocoa Touch, which assume reference-sharing in many places.

Posted by chc on Jun 4, 2014, 6:15 PM

Tags

Related issues

Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.9,500 issues0 comments

hackernews (Other)

It's more than that.

chcJun 4, 2014, 6:15 PM

It's more than that. I don't think having non-reference objects is entirely impossible (e.g. Objective-C blocks are already stack-based objects until they are copied), but it doesn't work for Swift's design goals. Objects have to be reference types because Swift needs to interact with Cocoa and Cocoa Touch, which assume reference-sharing in many places.

Comments (0)

No comments yet. Start the discussion.

Comment on this issue