Apple’s Guidelines Now Allow Executable Code in Educational Apps and Dev Tools

https://www.macstories.net/linked/apples-app-store-guidelines-now-allow-executable-code-in-educational-apps-and-developer-tools/

by tempodox • 9 years ago

407 253 9 years ago

macstories.net

Jyaif• 9 years ago

Ah, but now we need to be able to spawn processes (at least one extra), otherwise we app developers can't secure the user's data in our own app...

manmal2• 9 years ago

How would an extra process protect your app's memory? Also, I'm sure those apps will not be allowed to execute code outside their own process.

JoshTriplett• 9 years ago

If you're going to run arbitrary user code, you really want a sandbox, ideally in a separate address space for added protection. An interpreted language has an easier time isolating itself via its runtime (though it's just a bug away from code execution or data access), but any kind of compiled or JITted language desperately wants a completely separate address space.

barrkel• 9 years ago

Technically any program which loads a file is executing loaded code - the file is interpreted as a set of instructions about what data structures to create. This is more explicit for things like vector formats, and reaches its logical conclusion with things like postscript files.

manmal2• 9 years ago

PS and JS are heavily sandboxed though. With this exception an app's user will be able to code up integrations with other apps, additional push notification handlers, or load remote code like native OCR modules or drone controls.

sudhirj• 9 years ago

Anyone know how Swift Playgrounds work? Do they interpret the Swift code or compile it against a set of mock APIs?

antfarm• 9 years ago

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/40593918/how-does-apples...

saagarjha5• 9 years ago

The code is compiled on-the-fly and dynamically linked.

IMcD23• 9 years ago

It has a full Clang/LLVM built in, and runs Playgrounds in a separate process. Most of this uses private app extensions and XPC, which other developers are not able to use.

ferdterguson2• 9 years ago

I feel like we are inching closer to being able to write code on iOS. Swift storyboards on the iPad kind of opened the door and I hope we can keep chipping away at this.

The day I can run and write Python natively on iOS is the day I buy an iPad Pro. Right now there are some good ssh clients and I can write code from a terminal, but pros of the device are not worth that tradeoff right now IMO.

nreilly• 9 years ago

Keep an eye on Pythonista. I expect there'll be an update based on this change soon making it a lot more usable.

http://omz-software.com/pythonista/

rcarmo• 9 years ago

You can already do quasi-pip installs on it., provided you're dealing with pure Python modules.

(I do that by syncing files from my Dropbox via the API, but there are other ways)

scrumper2• 9 years ago

It's already really useful. You can create local apps with home-screen icons on it. You can install whatever packages you want (download and run StaSh inside Pythonista to get a command line with pip). You can even use git with it, again through StaSh. For me it's a first-class Python development environment that I can use when away from my main computer.

The only shortcoming today is that you can't get code into it except by grabbing it from a git repo or pasting it in from the clipboard. Today's policy change should directly address that limitation.

jowiar• 9 years ago

For a year or so I've kicked around the idea of building a dev or data science environment based around iPad backed by cloud computation.

That said, I'm pretty sure there's a new sort of "code" based around the iPad's interaction paradigm that is different from a desktop.

mozumder• 9 years ago

I already have an iPad Pro 12". It's seriously capable of being a laptop replacement if the software vendors push real products onto it. (looking at you Adobe Illustrator!)

Anyways, how soon can I expect it to run a native Xcode or Visual Studio IDE editor, with a local Python interpreter running Django on uWSGI and a web server, backed up a Postgres database and Redis caches, with Git?

Is Apple reserving actual development for Macs only?

tangue• 9 years ago

+1 for Illustrator. Béziers curves are such a match with touchscreens

d08ble2• 9 years ago

Native Xcode or VS run on mobile is not possible by multiple hardware/software issues.

I'm using iPad for developing in Xcode using ACPU remote control of my Mac from 2014. I was made special ACPU-bot for touch control of remote Xcode execution and low bandwidth connection.

http://acpul.tumblr.com/post/116464494150/xcode-on-ipad

interpol_p4• 9 years ago

You've been able to write and run code on iOS for a very long time. Since the first iPad was released.

Pythonista came out quite a long time ago now, and it's easy enough to write your own script to download and install projects from a git repository or elsewhere. Same for my app, Codea. What Apple has never allowed was an easy way for users to transfer / download / install code onto their device that was built into the app. If the user was willing to write (or copy and paste) someone else's code then Apple were kind of OK with it.

Both Pythonista and Codea have the ability to export Xcode projects for publishing on the store (though regardless of whether they have that feature, you were never prevented from writing and running code on your iPad).

nolok3• 9 years ago

Let me give a courtesy remainder that it is "... until Apple change their mind".

Whatever the provider, I really hate those walled gardens where what you can deliver or not is at the whims of a company whose interest is not always aligned with yours. I understand being on them is necessary due to how large their market are, but this is really not where I hoped we would be fifteen years ago.

I guess I'm merely venting, and daydreaming about what could have been, "if only"...

beefsack• 9 years ago

Possibly scarier than the fact that crap like this even exists is the amount of ecosystem aligned zealotry that you see even on places like HN, vehemently defending anti-developer policies purely because of the amount of personal investment in the ecosystem.

crowbahr2• 9 years ago

Sunk costs are a real thing.

stouset• 9 years ago

This is a pretty unnecessary straw man. There are a lot of people who defend particular ecosystems in spite of anti-developer policies for defensible reasons.

coldtea6• 9 years ago

vehemently defending anti-developer policies purely because of the amount of personal investment in the ecosystem

Well, some consider them pro-user or pro-ecosystem policies.

Not everybody agrees in the "open for all" as the best option for every tech.

brlewis• 9 years ago

Instead of questioning the motives of people who disagree with you, how about a concrete example with citation? This comment sides with yours but makes the point better: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14536374

criddell• 9 years ago

vehemently defending anti-developer policies

Developers do some pretty shitty things. Lots of us using Apple stuff came from more open ecosystems and are here at least partially because Apple restricts what developers do.

My video game console is very closed. My phone is fairly open. The controller on my weekend project is a Raspberry Pi - very open. It's not a question of zealotry really.

coldtea6• 9 years ago

I understand being on them is necessary due to how large their market are, but this is really not where I hoped we would be fifteen years ago.

Depends on who "we" are. Some people also wanted a hassle free device, which only runs curated apps, and that keeps the whole experience more secure, unified, private, etc that a "open for all" environment.

nolok3• 9 years ago

Oh of course I'm aware of that, that's why I said the whole thing as my own wishes ("I hoped we would be"). I can also see the value in such a device, my main gripe is the total lack of realistic alternative in the smartphone market right now.

DanielBMarkham2• 9 years ago

Did they? Or did the industry quickly lock hardware devices into little gadgets for generating income?

I don't think most people know what they want. They've never understood the trade-off. Instead they just go to their local electronics supplier and take something off the shelf.

_pmf_• 9 years ago

Some people also wanted a hassle free device, which only runs curated apps

But Apple fails to meet this wish, too. If the curation consists of barely keeping out the absolutely worst of abysmal stuff, but allows regular crap apps, that does not count as "curated".

jacquesm11• 9 years ago

This is roughly along the lines of the vast majority of the people that would happily vote in a police state if it meant that they were safe.

Freedom is a good thing, even if it comes at the price of some risk, no matter what the context.

wolfgke9• 9 years ago

Depends on who "we" are. Some people also wanted a hassle free device, which only runs curated apps, and that keeps the whole experience more secure, unified, private, etc that a "open for all" environment.

To serve this kind of users I think what Apple does is perhaps all right. What I criticize strongly is that there is no option for experienced users (besides jailbreaking) to free themselves (also completely) from this walled garden - ideally in a way that allows users to free themselves only for certain security aspects so that they still have the security advantages of the prohibitions that they don't deactivate.

Shivetya• 9 years ago

Yet we saw in a story last week how this protection doesn't amount to much when an app can generate 80k a month fraudulently because Apple isn't policing their store to the level many believe them to be doing.

ungzd• 9 years ago

Some people also wanted a hassle free device, which only runs curated apps, and that keeps the whole experience more secure, unified, private

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14526156

In fact, app store is opposite of all these qualities. Secure? It's provided by sandboxing, not app censorship. But almost every popular game in app store will read your contacts and send to its server. Unified? No one, except for top companies are able to follow UI guidelines, and most apps has weird UI. Even good apps have over-use of arcane swipe actions which makes them un-unified. Private? Most apps are very privacy-invasive. Even you are making app as a hobby, you will likely use privacy-invasive ad networks in order to pay back $100/year ad store fee.

mikeash6• 9 years ago

If Apple allowed sideloading then you could have what you want and I could have what I want too.

hungerstrike• 9 years ago

You don't need a walled garden to have a hassle free experience. Apple could easily allow sideloading and only the people who enable would be asking for "trouble".

cm21875• 9 years ago

Windows is getting there very very fast too.

I made a fresh install of the latest windows 10 pro this week end, and it is now very difficult to do simple things like changing the default program for an extension. I wanted to use Irfanview for jpg files but the primary menu for allocating an app to images will now only allow you to select a windows store app, not a local app (and you cannot change the default program from a contextual menu on the file anymore). Otherwise you have to go through a list of thousands of extensions to find manually the correct one (of course no search). Needless to say I didn't bother to change png, bmp, gif & others.

Windows is more unappealing by the minute. It will become the same locked down OS than iOS, unsuitable for developpers and power users.

pjmlp11• 9 years ago

I want a sandboxed OS where random app X doesn't access my $HOME data just because it feels like it.

As for developers, iOS is quite suitable as the set of developer sessions last week at WWDC 2017 proved, and I do have lots of fun targeting UWP.

Many of us, developers, are quite ok with following the rules of the platforms we target.

oblio• 9 years ago

My money's on this happening due to an internal power struggle within Microsoft. The Windows division was historically the top dog within Microsoft (probably on par with Office).

They can't maintain that status: PC renewal cycles are long and the PC market is decreasing, both in terms of market share and in absolute values. I guess they're trying to get more money from this stable or even shrinking market share.

My guess is that at some point Microsoft bosses will really start butting heads and Azure/developer tools + Office/enterprise applications won't budge, especially since they're on the rise. Windows damaging Microsoft's reputation hurts all their businesses and I doubt they will let this happen for long.

I believe big parts of Windows will become more and more open and even Windows itself could open sourced within 10 years, at most.

clouddrover6• 9 years ago

it is now very difficult to do simple things like changing the default program for an extension

Do this:

1. Go to Windows Settings -> Apps -> Default Apps

2. Scroll down and select "Set defaults by app"

3. Choose IrfanView and then "Choose defaults for this program"

4. Select all the file types you want associated with IrfanView (JPEG, PNG, GIF, etc).

5. Click Save.

That should do it.

int_19h3• 9 years ago

the primary menu for allocating an app to images will now only allow you to select a windows store app, not a local app

I don't know what you consider "the primary menu", but Settings | App | Defaults lets you choose any app that's registered for the purpose - e.g. for me it shows Chrome for web browser and mail, and Paint.NET for photo viewer.

and you cannot change the default program from a contextual menu on the file anymore

Sure you can. If you click "Open With" in Explorer, you get the list of several most used apps registered for this file type, both Store and non-Store. If you then click "Choose another app", you get a dialog with the complete list of apps (again, both Store and non-Store), and at the bottom it has a checkbox to always open this type with the selected app

danpalmer2• 9 years ago

Definitely wearing my Apple fanboy hat here, but...

Let me give a courtesy remainder that it is "... until Apple change their mind".

I'm going to propose that there has been ~1 legitimate case of this in iOS history. Maybe 2?

I feel like for the most part, the original guidelines were pretty solid. While they weren't complete and have been changed significantly since the original publication, most of this has been to add guidelines around new features (like push notifications), and to clarify rules. This clarification could be read as Apple changing their mind, but I reckon almost every instance has been 'obvious' and that it would almost always be apps that were knowingly skirting way too close to the rules, and not acting within the spirit of the guidelines, that got burned.

Tepix• 9 years ago

I suggest you check out http://www.appstorereviewguidelineshistory.com/

Sure, you may agree with most of them, but what if you're the developer of an app such as a cryptic watch app for the Apple Watch, and then Apple decides to block all apps on the watch who's main function is displaying the time (like they did)?

PaulRobinson• 9 years ago

I think some people need a walled garden. Genuinely - the reason why I gave my Mum a MacBook was because I was fed up of having to deal with the mess of the Windows machine every time I went home.

What would be better is is if in the device settings I was able to say "I know I downloaded this, and I know it's not signed, and I'm OK with running it", just like I do on macOS and have done for some time.

The walled garden approach was there for some time because of carrier concerns initially, but now it's purely commercial: Android has shown a more liberal attitude with better security around key pieces of hardware can still protect the carrier network from malicious attack.

Apple now have such huge value-add in terms of the app store - Apple Pay, discoverability, ratings and so on - that most developers would happily pay to be there. However, yes, it would be nice if I could choose what goes onto my device if I agree it's on me if something goes "wrong".

DaiPlusPlus• 9 years ago

I doubt carrier concerns were the motivation for the Apple iPhone App Store - they'd have mandated some kind of AT&T and Sprint App Store (with $2 ring-tone and wallpaper downloads...). Besides, Windows Mobile, Nokia and Blackberry all had their own respective ecosystems long before Apple - I say this as a user of PocketGear since 2001.

I hate to say it, but Apple is right: the use-cases for truly unlocked computing on constrained mobile devices are very limited and, given our experience with the Windows tech support scammers a massive liability for everyone: if non-expert users have any access to a button on their phone that will drain their bank accounts, no matter how clearly labelled, then there will be rampant attacks to make them press it; the only solution, therefore, is to make it completely impossible to both run unsigned code, and for code to execute outside of a sandbox.

In the early days of iOS - there was a much stronger justification for jailbreaking because iOS was just so aneamic - useful features like a Widget Dashboards or "Today" summary screen, data tethering, and ad-blocking were all conspicuously absent. But now we've got them and since iOS 8 or 9, it's been perfect for me.

jshelly• 9 years ago

I struggle to comprehend the arguments against Apple's way of doing things, it clearly works very well for the people in the ecosystem. If it's not your style then perhaps some other platform is?

interpol_p4• 9 years ago

I've just submitted an update to Codea[1] that allows for the importing of user projects[2]

It has been "In Review" for a suspiciously long time now. So I think it might be testing the application of these updated policies.

I have often submitted updates to App Review which include the ability to download and install executable code (along with review notes detailing my reasoning) with the knowledge that they would be rejected. I have also appealed Apple's rejections in order to effect a change in policy for the App Store. At some point during phone calls with the reviewers they told me they were "advocating for policy change internally on my behalf" even if they couldn't approve my app right now. I'm so glad policy has changed now.

[1] https://codea.io

[2] https://twitter.com/twolivesleft/status/873692454947442688

kbutler2• 9 years ago

Thanks - both for the app and for trying to improve the world for users and other developers!

erikpukinskis3• 9 years ago

This thread is getting beastly but I want to weigh in to comment that The Web is an interesting alternative to this problem.

Rather than allowing dangerous apps and requiring them to undergo corporate review, The Web just assumes the app is nefarious, lets anyone at all run anything they want, but architects the runtime so that apps can't do anything unsafe.

There is heavy debate about what constitutes "unsafe"... privacy-wise, security-wise. And features like graphics shaders and camera stream take longer to diffuse. And different devices make different choices on these subjects.

But choosing to target the browser as The Computer is a vote against app stores. And a vote for bringing the safety and freedom of the sandbox closer to the metal, rather than going straight to the bottom while forfeiting our freedom.

Do you accept a class-based system where the privileged class gets "full" device access and hope the class divide gets fairer.... Or do you accept limited device access in exchange for a truly egalitarian distribution landscape, while hoping device access will improve? To me that's the choice for developers, and I choose the latter.

ksk2• 9 years ago

Except, the runtime is based on standards that are entirely class-based because of which vendors control the runtime, and can bully their way into standards bodies and push their agenda.

interpol_p4• 9 years ago

I feel like you are conflating two issues in your comparison. Building code for devices, and distributing that code on the App Store.

We (programmers) have great device access without undergoing corporate review. And this has only gotten better for the Apple ecosystem. I can go to Github, download an open source iOS project and build it for my device. They removed the $99/year barrier. An Apple ID is still needed, but the direction has been positive.

Publishing on the App Store is not really relevant. I can experiment, write code, and publish that code without Apple's blessing.

Any curated stores (stores for web apps are no exception — like the Chrome store) are going to put limits on what can be published. That is where their value lies. The curation entices users which creates demand that developers can service. Good curation is hard, and doing it well builds user trust. Developers can leverage that trust if they are willing to submit their work for review. And in the case of the App Store, developers can make income from that trust.

robterrell• 9 years ago

By the way, thanks for Codea! Two of my kids learned to code using it and I just got a third started with it yesterday.

interpol_p4• 9 years ago

Wow, thanks for sharing that!

sigjuice4• 9 years ago

Apple should just do a Darwin/macOS ARM VM on the iPad so developers can have ARM Homebrew and other Unix tools they are used to.

princekolt• 9 years ago

They don't have to. People have been compiling to arm for years now on macOS. Apple just needs to make the standard + Foundation + Cocoa touch libraries visible and linkable on iOS and then you'll have everything you need to run any unix tools and compile iOS apps on iOS.

pjmlp11• 9 years ago

I rather use XCode and other nice GUI tools.

JesseWright• 9 years ago

I actually appreciate that Apple stipulated "apps must make the source code... editable by the user". I personally think this helps with the educational spin to this currently, as it assures users are able to see source code but also tinker with it and learn. This is something I wish I would have had when I was in school - there were some editors at the time, but none of them could run any at that time to my knowledge.

I think this could really help a lot of students for what it is, and I hope it does well in that regard.

d08ble2• 9 years ago

Amazing! I've been waiting for this.

Animation CPU Studio will be published soon.

https://twitter.com/AcpuStudio

jlebrech• 9 years ago

so something like xcode on ipad is now possible, as they won't build it themselves.

simonh5• 9 years ago

I suspect this change is intended to pave the way for Swift Playgrounds, which already has a full LLVM implementation built in, to become a full dev environment. Or to spawn off a professional sibling App. I think they don't want to be accused of favouring their own dev tools too much compared to other options, so are making this possible for the existing dev tools pre-emptively to their own full-sized offering.

jacquesm11• 9 years ago

What I find absolutely incredible is that this is accepted at all. You really have to wonder how we went from a computer with a bunch of slots and open schematics to one that is so closed you need permission from the manufacturer to run whatever code you desire.

The degree of paternalism is astounding.

pinum• 9 years ago

It's better to think of iThings as semi-flexible embedded devices instead of general purpose computers.

jacquesm11• 9 years ago

Just imagine what the PC landscape would look like if the various big entities active in that space had figured out this trick before we - thankfully - got Linux on the server, meaning that if they try to take it away there will be a huge roar.

That's roughly what stands between us and losing our ability to compute with whatever hardware we want, whatever we want.

Cory Doctorow had it right all along, I'm just surprised with how fast we are getting there.

http://opentranscripts.org/transcript/coming-war-general-com...

veidr2• 9 years ago

I am sympathetic to your complaint, but it's like saying we went from general-purpose computers to toasters you can't program.

iPads aren't computers in the sense you're talking about. They are appliances that run a limited set of software titles to do a limited set of things that the manufacturer allows.

It's frustrating because they could be really interesting general-purpose computers. But they aren't, and never have been.

jacquesm11• 9 years ago

but it's like saying we went from general-purpose computers to toasters you can't program.

Give it a few more years, we're getting there.

iPads aren't computers in the sense you're talking about.

Of course they are.

They are appliances that run a limited set of software titles to do a limited set of things that the manufacturer allows.

No, that's just packaging and marketing.

It's frustrating because they could be really interesting general-purpose computers.

For want of a single bit switch they are. And that's no accident.

But they aren't, and never have been.

Of course they are. It was a conscious decision made by someone somewhere to not allow their use as general purpose computers, in other words something was added in order to take away the rights that you would come to expect.

This causes tons of these devices to end up in landfills at the end of their obsolete-by-design life-span and forces people into eco-systems they might not be using out of their free will if there was a choice to do so.

As I get older I feel I'm more and more in Stallmans' camp, I used to see him as on the money for the long term but that in our lifetimes it likely would not get that far. Now I'm starting to think that Stallman might have been an optimist after all.

There is an outside possibility that there will be a point in the future when suddenly old hardware that allowed you to run any program (just imagine!) will become very valuable.

Consultant32452• 9 years ago

Am I mistaken in believing that the Windows tablets offer the open ecosystem everyone here is asking for?

eludwig• 9 years ago

Not a Apple apologist, but I do own a bunch of iThings.

Apple's made a very opinionated choice in choosing what software to allow on the AppStore. On the Mac this isn't a fatal problem for developers due to the ability to side load applications. It’s the fact that apps can't be side loaded on iOS that causes the real damage (imo). But I also think Apple should be able to run their app store as they see fit.

Apple seems to be trying to figure out a way to have it all. They want a vibrant developer community without the all of the hairy cruft that comes with true choice, like viruses and malware. Again, imo, they lose something by forcing this choice down everyone's throat. They create too much friction for developers. There is that bottom-line terror every time a dev thinks about writing an app for iOS: will Apple allow this app to exist? To me, this is a horrible and limiting thing to have to even consider and the reason that in the long run Apple will have to give this idea up or see their platform slowly fade over time.

I'm torn, because I am glad that my Mom can be relatively safe when running her iPad with its limited selection of apps. But the idea that I have to think about whether or not an arbitrary person working at a huge multi-national can terminate my idea for an application is just too much freedom to give up.

Not sure what the answer is, but official app side loading would go a LONG way (for me) towards reducing that friction.

kristofferR2• 9 years ago

Apps can be sideloaded on iOS really easily. There's a whole community of people (https://reddit.com/r/sideloaded) around modifying apps and sideloading them. https://ipasigner.io is an example - just click the app you want to install, go into iOS settings and give permissions to the cert, and boom you have a new sideloaded app installed. Takes less than a minute, no computer required.

It used to be even simpler in iOS 8, but Apple complicated the process a little bit for valid security reasons: https://blog.lookout.com/ios-9-sideloading

The only friction is that the sideloaded apps will only work for 7 days unless you (or someone else like on ipasigner.io) have a paid developer account.

If you want to sideload your own apps, Cydia Extender is a great tool.

matthewmacleod2• 9 years ago

There is that bottom-line terror every time a dev thinks about writing an app for iOS: will Apple allow this app to exist? To me, this is a horrible and limiting thing to have to even consider and the reason that in the long run Apple will have to give this idea up or see their platform slowly fade over time.

I'm not convinced. We all know the rules: "Don't take the piss".

maxxxxx• 9 years ago

Agreed. And it's interesting how many people think this is a good thing.

goshx• 9 years ago

You are free to build and run your own apps on your devices with whatever code you desire.

Now, talking about MY devices, I don't think you should run whatever you want. That's why I like that there is someone making sure that whatever I run on my device from a 3rd party is safe.

If you have an iPhone, what anti-virus are you using? Exactly.

austenallred• 9 years ago

While that's true, having seen how frequently my parents and grandparents would bring their computers to a grinding halt by installing stuff they didn't understand, I get it.

It's worth pointing out that I can still install whatever I want on my phone. Apple just protects its official distribution channel.

jonknee4• 9 years ago

You really have to wonder how we went from a computer with a bunch of slots and open schematics to one that is so closed you need permission from the manufacturer to run whatever code you desire.

Yet look what happened to sales after they debuted the closed hardware and OS. At the end of the day the mass customer prefers devices that are easy to use and hard to break.

I'd personally love an iOS with a little more flexibility, but considering it's a device that knows so much about me I am OK with the trade offs. Things like Apple forcing[1] the location permission option "only while using the app" is awesome for the end user. I end up trying out way more software on iOS than OS X because I have a reasonable expectation that whatever happens I can just delete it in one standard operation.

[1] https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/6/7/15757774/io...

mmastrac• 9 years ago

Yet look what happened to sales after they debuted the closed hardware and OS. At the end of the day the mass customer prefers devices that are easy to use and hard to break.

I don't think the locked-down device had anything to do with this. You could hack the old iPods with custom firmware to do all sorts of fun things and those things were still the most popular devices on the market.

simonh5• 9 years ago

What astounds me is the extent to which these restrictions provide tangible benefits. If someone had described the iOS walled garden to me in 2005, then explained how Android was so much more open, I'd have assumed I would never even consider using an iOS device. It would have seemed simply inconceivable that a locked down system could be so attractive and provide so many benefits for users. And yet iOS is a slick, professional, highly productive environment and Android is a junky horrrible mess. I've dipped my toes in Android a few times and always retreated back to the comfortable safety of iOS in horror.

So here we are. With steps like this iOS is getting better at a very steady clip. We might even have Dropbox or even Github synchronisation built into Pythonista soon. Can't wait!

pmarreck• 9 years ago

Did they ever consider that any number of web browsers can already execute javascript?

spacehunt• 9 years ago

On iOS there's basically only one browser available.

Besides, Javascript has been allowed for quite a while for things like React Native.

noblethrasher• 9 years ago

Funny coincidence: I just downloaded Scratch Jr. for my nephew this past weekend, only to be disappointed that we couldn't view the other projects from within the app, nor could he share his.

I hope that we can now expect to get this feature, soon.

brians• 9 years ago

One step closer to Emacs on iPad.

83457• 9 years ago

yay, pico-8 should be allowed now

mark_l_watson• 9 years ago

One of my favorite apps is Raskell, basically Haskell 98 ported to iOS. It uses Dropbox for storage so it is possible to move small Haskell applications in and out of iOS. Pythonista is also very cool.

I like the safety of the iOS walled garden but I also see real value in complex IDEs like IntelliJ running on iPad Pros.

fgandiya2• 9 years ago

I hope this mean I can easily load scripts onto Pythonista. It's a real pain right now.

scrumper2• 9 years ago

If it's any help to you, I've had great success using StaSh and git for getting stuff into it.

fgandiya2• 9 years ago

That what I've been using. It works pretty well.

jonknee4• 9 years ago

Could they just start supporting the new Files app in iOS 11?

jonknee4• 9 years ago

Silly question, but how does WeChat get around this? Does custom code for Official Accounts just work on Tencent's server and basically work in a WebView?

kccqzy• 9 years ago

I suppose the custom code is just custom JavaScript code. It has always been possible to execute arbitrary JavaScript code, including those downloaded remotely. No WebView needed.

eecc• 9 years ago

Good: http://haskellformac.com

paultopia4• 9 years ago

Honestly, I try to write code on iOS all the time, and it's not really the absence of tools that can execute that code that really stands in the way. Instead, it's:

- The absence of a really good typing story. The 12.9 iPad Pro with smart keyboard is nice for typing text but terrible for moving the cursor around. It's agonizingly slow to do it with keyboard (highlighting is worse, for some reason) and inaccurate to do it with finger/fiddly to do it with Pencil.

The only text editor with vim keybindings (an absolute must in an environment where it's hard to move the cursor normally...) of which I'm aware is Buffer, while the only text editor with both good syntax highlighting and good github integration (via Working Copy) is Textastic. Honestly, I really wish one of those two would just buy the other so that I could have both.

- The absence of a really good ssh story. Prompt is nice, but for some reason, whenever I try to SSH into anything, there's so much latency that it is really painful to actually do anything. Maybe I just have slow network connections? But anyway, so much for just coding on a linode or something in vim.

nouveaux• 9 years ago

I'm not sure why Prompt is slow for you but as a suggestion, I really like using Blink. It supports Mosh and it might help with your latency problem

paultopia4• 9 years ago

Thanks! I'll totally give it a try.

yangl1996• 9 years ago

\+1 for this. Mosh solved all problems an iPad ssh client may have. It allows the client to go offline and reconnect in no time when the client is back online, which is a common case on iOS (apps get killed when being in background for a short time). Lower latency (thanks to local echoing) and seamless switch between networks (cellular and wifi roaming) are also definitely nice to have. I tested Blink (a client on iOS with Mosh support) on a high-speed-rail trip from Shanghai to Beijing and it was rock solid.

jimbokun3• 9 years ago

My son has been going through Swift Playgrounds, and I think the text selection and editing has been one of the things slowing him down.

giobox• 9 years ago

Does he know the two finger drag on keyboard gesture? This lets you drag the text cursor around like the keyboard is a giant trackpad - it's game-changing for typing on an iPad if you weren't aware of it before, and makes navigating text significantly better.

sologoub• 9 years ago

Been doing Prompt2 to Linode on an iPad Air (the first one) for a couple of years, mostly over 3G or LTE and haven't noticed much of a lag.

Perhaps my expectations are deflated because of the mobile connection...

rahoulb• 9 years ago

I use Blink (which means setting up Mosh, but Mosh is awesome)

tootie• 9 years ago

Wait, why?

jclardy• 9 years ago

I agree, the one thing I was hoping for with the new 10.5" and other iPad announcements was some sort of indirect cursor input for the Smart Keyboard.

It doesn't even need to be a full trackpad, even just a nub would work - the idea is it would just be used to move the text cursor around the screen. The on-screen keyboard does it really well...but typing on the on-screen keyboard isn't great (and obstructs half the display.)

photojosh2• 9 years ago

Just checking... the Emacs + standard macOS shortcuts don't work for you?

Ctrl-A/E or Cmd+left/right arrows for start/end of line

Option+left/right for prev/next word

and more here: http://jblevins.org/log/kbd

Disclaimer: I use an Apple Wireless Keyboard or other BT keyboard, not the Smart Keyboard. YMMV.

(Edit: line breaks)

paultopia4• 9 years ago

oh, interesting! I didn't know those would work on iOS, but at least some of them do. That's a nice tip.

sedm0784• 9 years ago

The only text editor with vim keybindings

Vim also has Vim keybindings. ;)

Sadly, the iOS version has a number of other issues that make it impractical for real use, which is probably why you overlooked it.

(Apologies for the pedantic derail. I couldn't stop myself.)

dalacv• 9 years ago

Just an FYI, I use a cheap Android device with a Bluetooth keyboard and mouse and use Termux which is a Linux emulator with support for many packages including vim, python, jupyter, task warrior and much more

laughingman2• 9 years ago

The irony of people defending apple because its "safe" and doesn't let you "shoot yourself in the foot" in a forumn named Hacker news.

What is happening to hacker culture? I think as influx of new programmers increase, awareness on the culture's ethos of freedom, liberty, anti-authoritarianism, anti corporatism has to be increased.

Or we will have people loving to be jailed by their benevolent overlords in "apple/google/facebook/etc"

joemi• 9 years ago

Not everyone shares your _exact_ ideals, even amidst those sharing the hacker ethos. In the same way that not everyone sharing the hacker ethos is as extreme as Stallman. In the same way that not everyone here uses linux distros exclusively. Clearly there's a spectrum of beliefs/ethos. Otherwise, you could pedantically point out something that's not purely hacker-focused about almost every single post on HN.

Aaron1011• 9 years ago

Apple’s Guidelines Now Allow Executable Code in Educational Apps and Dev Tools

This title is somewhat confusing - it makes it sound as though educational apps and dev tools somehow weren't allowed to execute code before, which doesn't make any sense.

klinquist• 9 years ago

Dear VSCode team... now is the time for VSCode for the iPad!

adm2life• 9 years ago

Good step in right way !

Apple’s Guidelines Now Allow Executable Code in Educational Apps and Dev Tools

Related Stories