A meta comment (not on Swift): the number of new languages with C-like syntax and nothing revolutionary semantically is baffling. Do we really need to master yet another C-like syntax to do X where a library (or an existing language) would have sufficed? Is this the new way to create technological walls?
Edit: Not to mention automated memory management!
I don't understand the need to create something rickety without significant innovation (over any relevant language (e.g. SML, Haskell, Racket) and not just C).
Are you saying that the new features in Swift/Rust/C#/etc. aren't revolutionary? Or that they're not "across the board"? Or that they're not semantic? Which part do you disagree with?
> This is a double blow as each new C-like syntax ... contributes nothing semantically new.
This is demonstrably false. Do you mean that you don't think the new semantics are revolutionary enough? Or "across the board" enough?
Either way I have to disagree with you. Automated memory management is a semantic game changer, and applies nearly everywhere. Same goes for type inference, and optionals. ADTs are huge too. If your argument is that these are not important semantic improvements over C, then IMO you could not be more wrong.
E.g,
> Automated memory management is a semantic game changer
That has been there in other languages for decades.
By "across the board," I meant across all languages not just C-like languages.
The more I learn about Rust, the more I realise how similar it is to Haskell. Even the error handling and IO uses monad-like constructions.