I think it’s a good point actually. I think it’s reasonable to say swift isn’t intended as a language to experiment with a specific concept, it’s a six year old production language designed for a general set of usecases where it’s good at a bunch of things that the languages it is replacing weren’t as good at. There’s some interesting discussions to be had about tradeoffs it makes but a question like “what’s the one thing swift does that other languages don’t do” is not the right way to evaluate a production language. It might explain why some people don’t find it interesting but swift was built to be a better tool, not merely an interesting one.
A lot of really good programming languages are “uninteresting” in this way, and that’s probably a good sign, not a bad one.
There was no point made other than the language is 6 years old and "someone" uses it. That's nice. I'm sure I can find other languages 6 years or older which people use and are not worth using.
How long has Swift been available outside of Apple platforms? And I don't mean experimentally available either. They only posted an announcement a few days ago where Swift is deemed ready for early adopters on Windows. That certainly does not sound production quality there.
the question was in the context of swift open sourcing something. if it s an apple-ecosystem-specific language , it s not much use to the general audience
A lot of really good programming languages are “uninteresting” in this way, and that’s probably a good sign, not a bad one.