The issue with this in practice is that there are always cases where panics are absolutely the correct course of action. When program state is bad enough that you can't safely continue, you need to panic (and core dump in dev). Otherwise you are likely just creating an integrity minefield for you to debug later.
Not saying there aren't applications where using these lints couldn't be alright (web servers maybe), but at least in my experiences (mostly doing CLI, graphics, and embedded stuff) trying to keep the program alive leads to more problems than less.
You're right, it is easy to over engineer sites these days. It boils down to tooling for SPAs vs traditional static sites. The tooling for making static sites, even the most modern tooling such as Hugo or Jekyll, simply pales in comparison to libraries such as React, Vue, or others. The author is absolutely right that developers are attracted to shiny new objects, and the interest of the greater community is focused on SPA libraries when we should be equally (or arguably, more) focused on static site generation libraries as well.
Haha, that "sample security test" is hilarious. Basically just a link to SSL Labs saying they meet industry standard. That's great, glad they can meet low hanging fruit. How about proving that they can do better?
Yes, and I think people should head to Swift if it fits their needs. That is very different from Objective-C losing support however. Objective-C is not going away.
That is extremely unlikely. Enough so that I would bet money on it.
Swift is targeted at the largest user base of the Obj-C language, the iOS developers. Obj-C will be around for a long time both for legacy purposes and because Swift doesn't interop with K&R C (unless that code has an Obj-C wrapper, like CoreFoundation), and C++ code. Since both Swift and Obj-C support using Cocoa libraries, any API added to Cocoa will be usable by both, but Cocoa is only one of many libraries in the Macintosh ecosystem.
Swift will become a replacement for the development the vast majority of people do, but that doesn't mean that Obj-C is going away. Apple has done nothing to indicate so; they've really been stressing the point that Swift is intended as a new tool to work along side your old one (Obj-C).
No, it doesn't. It is a great way to do 99% of the tasks most developers do. There is, and always will be, a place for Obj-C on the Macintosh platforms. Apple recognizes that most developers don't need the verbosity and tight-knit compatibility with C that Obj-C provides, and that is where Swift comes in.
Not saying there aren't applications where using these lints couldn't be alright (web servers maybe), but at least in my experiences (mostly doing CLI, graphics, and embedded stuff) trying to keep the program alive leads to more problems than less.