While I do appreciate macros, and use them sparingly I find the best case for them is doing things like generating to/from <protocol> (e.g. JSON) implementations.
In Haskell, there's a fully baked system for derivation where you can set up implementations that walk the type trees, but most other languages don't have that -- I find macros to be a great slightly lower complexity way to do this kind of thing.
What is Swift's answer in production? Does everyone just write extensions for their types? Rust's serde is a joy to use and 99% of the time "just works", despite the macro magic.
> Type system function resolution
I'm not sure this is a real problem for me or most people, but taken with the point about polymorphism (I guess this point is basically about late binding), I see the benefit here.
> Protocols vs Traits as implemented
Generic methods being allowed in Swift is quite nice.
> Sugar
Great points in there -- some of them are style/preference but I can definitely see benefits to a bunch of them.
The string interpolation point you might want to update (Rust does that now!)
Named arguments are also quite amazing.
Again, fantastic list -- saved! I've been meaning to give Swift a proper try lately and this is a great reference.
For the record "No macros", is one of the things that is out-of-date. There is some discussion about it in the comments... maybe I'll be forced to actually update it :)
After having written a few of them at this point at $DAYJOB and on my own... They're actually not so bad at all -- it's quite nice the world that they open up.
I'd venture to say most people are mostly annoyed at the overuse of macros (where a simple function would do).
Rust's attribute system is something it REALLY got right -- stuff like #[cfg(test)] and the conditional compilation stuff is really really impressive. Not sure what cross platform dev looks like in Swift but the bar is quite high in Rust land.
