jshier

SwiftLint and SwiftFormat are different tools than swift-format, which is what is included with Swift itself. swift-format is less capable than either, or similar tools from other ecosystems. Personally I use the other two. And they don't usually require updates for new language versions, and when they do, they update quickly, as they aren't part of the Swift toolchain and subject to its glacial release process.

Mac Studio waits for the Ultra chips to ship, which are always last in a generation. Perhaps the M5's chiplet architecture will help them move faster there.

They posted about the Rust rewrite last year. https://blog.cloudflare.com/20-percent-internet-upgrade/

Yes, exactly. It also allows you to disambiguate overloaded function. e.g. thing.ModuleA::doThing() vs. thing.ModuleB::doThing(), which wasn't possible with the previous syntax.

Looks like swift-build will be the default in Swift 6.4: https://forums.swift.org/t/swiftpm-development-update-defaul...

Unfortunately, swift-build is what Xcode has been using for years now, and has major performance issues: https://forums.swift.org/t/target-dependency-graph-computati...

Perhaps using it in both SPM and Xcode will lead to improvements, but I'm not especially optimistic.

What, of course Apple uses Swift on the server, that's the only reason they're investing in any of this. Many of the foundational Swift on the server libraries were written at Apple and later opened, like SwiftNIO.

Wow, Cox's original Objective-C book? Interesting historically, but it's hard to imagine it was of much pragmatic use, even if you're working in Obj-C as your day-to-day. Still, it's an interesting artifact of the early OO age, and the metaphor of libraries of objects as integrated circuits was interesting.

LittleSnitch also does filtering, so it's both parts of the solution: it allows inspection of outgoing connections, at least by domain, and filtering of those connections you don't want, allowing you to block ads and most data networks.

Answering my own question, they need a way for users to grant location permission only to the primary app and not any of its dependencies, as once you grant it, it's available to all code in the app. It would be great if there was some way to separate those.

They could also better enable network traffic inspection on device, so we could tell where data is going. LittleSnitch on iOS would be great.

What would you like them to do? They already force apps to ask for permission, give user control over when the app can even access the location (including just once), tell the user when the app has been accessing the location repeatedly over time, and allow the user the shut off location services for each app individually whenever they want. So aside from shutting off more and more possible sideband sources of location information, what else are they supposed to do?

Unless you're saying Apple is selling the location information they may have directly?

Swift's concurrency story is what happens when a multi-year project meets Apple's fixed six month Swift release timeline. And being written by highly knowledgeable but low level engineers who've never written an iOS app in their life, means that there was a huge approachability hole they've only recently worked their way out of, but even that has major issues (MainActor default on in Xcode but not Swift itself).

It's an excuse generator, nothing more. They could use Hotdog / Not Hotdog and get the same result.

They still don't have strong backing to do this, they just don't have anyone to stop them.

A distinction without a difference, and it's questionable whether deportation is actually the goal here. If that were the case they could put him on plane today.

The nuances of criminal procedure may not apply, but the fundamental constitutional rights still do, as well as human rights. Indeterminate detention violates both.

That applies to those who step across the border as part of a border crossing or rescue. The court decision applies it to all aliens, which is the never before applied part of GP.

The practical effects are immediately obvious in the 4K remaster, which looks amazing. Still look great though!

Steam's ARM support is still beta, and Battle.net is still x86 only. So it seems more typical than not for these sorts of things.

They're great if you're in a populated area. If you're tracking pets in the country, you'll never see them, as there aren't any relay devices out in the woods.

Exception that proves that rule. It took national protests over months, during COVID, to drive that case through to conviction.

What a ridiculous statement given everything we've seen in the last year. The president doesn't have the authority to withhold funding to the states, or to deploy the national guard (absent an emergency), or to use the Justice Department as his personal law firm, and yet... All he needs to do is have the appropriate person fail to do their job and nothing gets paid.

Unfortunately the courts have repeated ruled that "aware of the Constitutional violation" means knowing that the exact action being observed had previously been ruled a violation of Constitutional rights. It's essentially impossible to prove, which is one of the reasons we don't see that offense prosecuted.

They found a weakness to justify an increase in violence to their base: the day care corruption. Despite the fact that most of that was found and prosecuted years ago, right-wing influencers were successfully able to bring it back to the forefront, and the administration jumped on it to justify an increased ICE presence, naturally leading to the violence we see. They didn't get the same thing in Chicago, where ICE avoided most of the areas likely to see violence in the first place. And they didn't leave Chicago, they just aren't publicizing it like they were.

After the Civil War, nearly all states gave up on maintaining their own independent militia and they became the National Guard (a few states maintain poorly provisioned state guards). Ostensibly the Guard is run by the states but can be federalized at any time. Previous presidents only used that to deploy the Guard overseas, with a few exceptions (notably Eisenhower, to enforce the early civil rights legislation and court decisions). Unfortunately those powers were never reformed, so Trump has already deployed them domestically (though there have been court decisions against that), but it effectively means states can't use the Guard to protect against federal aggression (it would simply be immediately federalized). Any attempt to actually deploy state troops against federal law enforcement, even when they're aren't justly enforcing laws, would be met with the Insurrection Act, allowing the deployment of active duty troops against the states, not just the Guard. Trump has been eagerly awaiting that moment, as it would allow him to completely cut the state off from the rest of the country, including Congress (you're in rebellion, you have no representation), and lock their elections in legal limbo.

Nowadays, the 2A is used simply to guarantee gun access to individuals, a movement underway since the early civil rights movement in the late '50s and largely confirmed with the Heller decision in '08. Unfortunately, that movement didn't bring any right to actually resist government overreach, which is why we haven't seen citizen militias form to violently resist ICE's own violence. They'd simply be killed and imprisoned and used to justify an increase in violence.

Personally, these events have really exposed the moral bankruptcy of the modern 2A movement. They want guns, and the attendant increase in shootings that accompany that, but have brought no real ability to resist government violence along with it. So we have the negative without the purported positive.

Obviously the next Congress and President will need to reform how the Guard works and how it can be deployed, otherwise we'll see this again.

To extend the analogy, Congress hasn't had their balls removed, they simply aren't humping other dogs right now.

I'm not an expert, but while many of SCOTUS' rulings have been against the plain letter of the law, few of the decisions ruled out Congressional power in those areas categorically. Congress could pass a new Voting Rights Act, or redefine the EPA's powers over wetlands, or any number of things, they just choose not to. And of course, even with a Democratic Congress, getting past the veto may be impossible.

Congress hasn't been neutered, they can reclaim their power at any time. Republicans in power simply refuse to act at all.

Boomers didn't create the EPA, that was the Greatest and Silent generations. Boomers were no more than 25 in 1970 and hardly in power. Some of them may have been in the activists pushing for change but they didn't actually pass the legislation.

"Stop asking the guy we hired to draw CSAM, we're not going to tell him to stop."

Xcode 26.2 is a 2.1GB download, which expands to 8.63GB on disk, which includes the macOS SDK. The iOS SDK and simulators are another 8.38GB. Luckily Xcode versions can share iOS SDKs now, so you only need to install them once. Really the biggest disk eater is Xcode's default behavior of creating a huge set of simulators for every platform.

> looks sequential [but isn’t]

This is just wrong. It looks sequential and it is! What the original author means is that it looks synchronous but isn't. But of course that's not really true either, given the use of the await keyword, but that can be explained by the brief learning curve.

Swift concurrency may use coroutines as an implementation detail, but it doesn't expose most of the complexity of that model, or exposes it in different ways.