Slightly unhinged and very incorrect, but probably still useful
actor: lock
isolation: which specific lock
nonisolated: no lock
Sendable: thread safe
non-Sendable: not thread safe
async: I might wait
await: I'm waiting, maybe just for a lock
Task: thread
compiler: pedantic, paranoid code reviewer
@mattiem that's my main problem with it – Apple went for a claim of 100% data race safety, which forced some unfortunate design choices, and now it feels like a giant waste of time for probably most applications.
I try not to rant about it too much, but it's OK once in a while, right?
@a_grebenyuk Reflecting, I think this might have come off dismissive and I didn’t mean that.
What I meant was ranting is fine, and I actually often find it quite useful. But if you want to have a discussion with me specially (which I’m not sure is always a given with a social media reply), then I’m very up for it!
@krzyzanowskim reading it again, I get why I said that. But, obviously more confusing than is was worth. I've experimented with a number of different ways to explain things and not all have worked out well.
Very sorry about that. The topic is hard enough without stuff like this being thrown around.
It is much better to just know that "nonisolated" means "no static isolation" and not think about it in terms of any other concept.
@rbsgn Haha it’s quite something that this keyword isn’t in there.
I don’t even remember at this point how I leaned it. It’s not a direct explanation of the keyword specifically, but it is talked about here.
https://www.swift.org/migration/documentation/swift-6-concurrency-migration-guide/dataracesafety
I have never written anything about it directly myself…
Will Lumley
Matt Massicotte
Martin Du4
eslam
Alex Grebenyuk
Marcin Krzyzanowski
Florian
Roman Busygin