jackson-module-kotlin VS swift-evolution

strictNullCheck option in the Kotlin module doesn't cover non-object-field situations at all. https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-module-kotlin/issues/479

But, it sucked. I was constantly finding bugs related to nullability, around generics, inline/value classes, etc. And it wasn't the typical trivial ones, either. Figuring out that you're calling a Java library and encountering a "platform type" is the least problematic. My biggest struggle came from using libraries that were written in Java first, but then added a Kotlin API on top. So, my code didn't know I was dealing with a platform type and neither did I. Yet they were still broken. Some of them are broken in an unfixable way, such as JacksonXML's Kotlin module: https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-module-kotlin/issues/479. So many Java libraries rely on reflection even when it's not obvious that they might, so you pretty much can't ever use value classes in Kotlin, including the unsigned number types.

You should add Jackson Module Kotlin in your project. After that, you can't specify a type of object explicitly.

Not really, you just need to handle some standard types and have a good extension mechanism to let the user implement factories. That library having built in support for UUID and datetime is probably a bit much, I'd prefer a plugin like https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-module-kotlin

There is a bug at this very moment that makes it literally impossible to deserialize [1, 2, 3, null] into a List with Jackson's Kotlin module. Yes- even if you set KotlinModule(strictNullChecks = true). It's just broken. (Here's the link: https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-module-kotlin/issues/479)

Got you, thanks. I didn’t mean to sound offensive - a better wording would be that they don’t seem to prioritize this part, at least based on https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-module-kotlin/issues/199, which has one abandoned branch from a 3rd party and a couple of comments from from maintainers.

If you use Jackson, don't forget to include the Kotlin extensions https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-module-kotlin

Did you include jackson-module-kotlin?

[A Vision for Embedded Swift](https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/main/visions/e...) has the details on this new build mode and is quite interesting.

> Effectively, there will be two bottom layers of Swift, and the lower one, “non-allocating” Embedded Swift, will necessarily be a more restricted compilation mode (e.g. classes will be disallowed as they fundamentally require heap allocations) and likely to be used only in very specialized use cases. “Allocating” Embedded Swift should allow classes and other language facilities that rely on the heap (e.g. indirect enums).

Also, this seems to maybe hint at the Swift runtime eventually being reimplemented in non-allocating Embedded Swift rather than the C++ (?) that it uses now:

> The Swift runtime APIs will be provided as an implementation that’s optimized for small codesize and will be available as a static library in the toolchain for common CPU architectures. Interestingly, it’s possible to write that implementation in “non-allocating” Baremetal Swift.

I may be out of my depth here as I've only casually used Rust, but this seems similar to Swift's proposed lifetime dependencies[1]. They're not in the type system formally so maybe they're closer to poloneius work

[1]: https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/3055becc53a3c3...

Swift recently adopted a region-based approach for safe concurrency that builds on Milano et al’s ideas: https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/main/proposals...

No, it's not. Refcounting CAN be a garbage collection algorithm, but in Swift it's deterministic and done at compile time. Not to mention recently added support for non-copyable types that enforces unique ownership: https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/main/proposals...

You can stackallocate buffers with unsafe Swift but it's not exactly fun to use. https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/main/proposals/0322-temporary-buffers.md

If the docs do not suffice, read the concurrency proposals of Swift Evolution. The authors describe the semantics in a very detailed way there.