You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Purpose of this list is to gather a source of information on how many people are working on iOS application.
I often wonder how many people are behind Facebook's app or Twitter's. If you're as curious as me, please share and please add apps 😉.
* - it's a rumoured value only. Needs confirmation from someone inside the company.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
When Swift was first announced, I was gratified to see that one of the (few) philosophies that it shared with Objective-C was that exceptions should not be used for control flow, only for highlighting fatal programming errors at development time.
So it came as a surprise to me when Swift 2 brought (What appeared to be) traditional exception handling to the language.
Similarly surprised were the functional Swift programmers, who had put their faith in the Haskell-style approach to error handling, where every function returns an enum (or monad, if you like) containing either a valid result or an error. This seemed like a natural fit for Swift, so why did Apple instead opt for a solution originally designed for clumsy imperative languages?
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Don't add code cruft. Avoid parentheses around conditions in if-statements or with the return keyword. Don't add semicolons except where syntactically demanded in statements or to separate statements on the same line.
Don't use ALL_CAPS; use camelCase
Don't fight type inference. Use enumeration prefixes, self-references, and class names (with constructors) only when necessary or to clarify coding intent.
Don't use var when let is appropriate, especially for properties. The compiler better optimizes let statements for items whose values will not change during their lifetime. For example, Apple writes, "It is good practice to create immutable collections in all cases where the collection does not need to change. Doing so enables the Swift compiler to optimize the performance of the collections you create."