As I sit here and write code using NIO and async library Vapor, I realize the pitfalls of Async which I want to not only warn about but discuss as theres a superseding thought that needs to be discussed. The warning is that any implementation of async/await in swift should take consideration of the notion that you will want to mix async with sync & sync with async with time notions precede the observation of any time discretinuum/continuum. Also, will need to mix await/wait mixes.
The superseding discussion is on how values should coded with respect to how time is distributed. To give a gist, heres the way I see it which includes some language features swift has or can have. The point is en/de coding values should respect how time is distributed in language.
was/didding (Past): Values that were fulfilled. (something along the lines of discrete storing set of hashed values via key paths)
being (Present) : Values that are filled. (sync values that coordinatable via returnable set of values)
doing (Current): Values that are filling. (continuously changing key paths)
going (Future): Values that will be fulfilled (async values that are values that are coordinatable via returnable voidings (swift doesn't have a void type but I suggest we have it and join this idea with the thread of "adding never" to the language. [Pitch] Never as a bottom type - #7 by Andre_Videla)
To add on, Swift as a type language, as I see it , will return the pave from dynamic coding patterns we have seen overtake the past decade (php, python, js) to the next decade of static typed languages. It can be strongly speculated that a dynamic language will come after the next decade to the next set explore the dynamic natures of the universe created by our current static perception provided by Swift. This is a pattern of tug of war that will continue forever and we must keep this rule in mind especially because designing something statically HAS to be consistent and tightly coupled with accurate generalizations of human perception. After all, we will need to enter the age of decidating wares (hard/middle/soft) after the age of computing dries up . Laws of computing will all take an inverse pivot like Moores Law and become Laws of decision. Theory of Computation to Theory of Decision. Even the intelligence of machinery which is equivalently growing at the same pace as human consciousness, will take a divergent pivot which is explained by the notion of the "singularity".
Decidations that will done by the new machines.
I would like your thoughts on what I mentioned and further more questions If you have. Some words I mentioned are not English words but thats the beauty of language, we can make our own words and prescribed them degrees of meanings further from a different word with similar morphological embeddings.