True, the ObjC culture was undeniably different than the CPAN-inspired code sharing cultures of Ruby and Python. So there were fewer quality libraries.
But the libraries did exist, and Apple devs in general came from a background of C and UNIX programming, where static libs weren't an oddity.
This is all different now, due to the huge influx of ObjC devs from the web world. Expectations have changed, CocoaPods emerged in response, etc.
But I have no explanation for the Swift situation, except that it looks and feels like ObjC and Cocoa. I think Mattt's point is that it needn't.
This might be a bit of C culture still showing through...any other conversion process would be, ultimately, magic. ObjC has never been about brevity or implicitness.
But the libraries did exist, and Apple devs in general came from a background of C and UNIX programming, where static libs weren't an oddity.
This is all different now, due to the huge influx of ObjC devs from the web world. Expectations have changed, CocoaPods emerged in response, etc.
But I have no explanation for the Swift situation, except that it looks and feels like ObjC and Cocoa. I think Mattt's point is that it needn't.
This might be a bit of C culture still showing through...any other conversion process would be, ultimately, magic. ObjC has never been about brevity or implicitness.