Yes, but it’s not officially “condoned”, so it feels “out of place”. This is very individual, of course, but I don’t like bending the system to get patterns that are not “natively” supported.

In Swift, you cannot currently create classes in code, enhance and swizzle, implement proper proxies. You couldn’t even load a nib without the ObjC runtime. Not even reflection. It’s telling what their priorities were with that language. What good is the language when you cannot implement most of the system frameworks (Cocoa, Core Data, etc.) without nasty hacks?

Or building a house with toothpaste. But this was more about what's more common/supported by the language/approved by the community rather than what's possible.

Compile times are not a temporary problem, they are fundamental. Yes, they can fix some of the more egregious specific problems, but the model they have chosen is inherently expensive to compile as it leans so much on the compiler.

And they no longer have Mr. Moore to bail them out by mere passage of time.

In fact, last I checked the compiler has actually gotten slower, overall, in recent versions.

I'm much more hopeful for ABI stability than C++ interoperatability. I think will take a long time before we'll be able to seamlessly work with C++ code as we do currently with say Objective-C or C.

Sure, by all means they should keep up the good work. I'll be happy to switch when it's ready. But until then, I'll stick to my trusty Objective-C for serious work.