Compare commits

..

No commits in common. "f1cdbea728f548b7caac96d5abeb56f22327b383" and "ecad667aed2508d927542d0a050f27516b3d7b84" have entirely different histories.

4 changed files with 5 additions and 24 deletions

View File

@ -37,10 +37,8 @@ async function generatePostFromFile(postPath: string, additionalMetadata: object
if (!(<PostMetadata>page.metadata).excerpt) { if (!(<PostMetadata>page.metadata).excerpt) {
const parts = page.text.split("<!-- excerpt-end -->"); const parts = page.text.split("<!-- excerpt-end -->");
if (parts.length > 1) {
(<PostMetadata>page.metadata).excerpt = parts[0]; (<PostMetadata>page.metadata).excerpt = parts[0];
} }
}
return page; return page;
} }

View File

@ -10,11 +10,9 @@
</h2> </h2>
<%- include("article-meta.html.ejs", { metadata: post.metadata }) %> <%- include("article-meta.html.ejs", { metadata: post.metadata }) %>
<div class="article-content" itemprop="description"> <div class="article-content" itemprop="description">
<%- post.metadata.excerpt ?? post.text %> <%- post.metadata.excerpt %>
</div> </div>
<% if (post.metadata.excerpt) { %>
<p class="read-more-link"> <p class="read-more-link">
<a href="<%= post.metadata.permalink%>">Read more...</a> <a href="<%= post.metadata.permalink%>">Read more...</a>
</p> </p>
<% } %>
</article> </article>

View File

@ -66,5 +66,3 @@ After abandoning that idea, the other, similarly unsuccessful, tactic I tried wa
That did not work. I don't know why. There seems to be very little visibility (read: none at all) into how Xcode chooses to static versus dynamic linking for Swift packages. That did not work. I don't know why. There seems to be very little visibility (read: none at all) into how Xcode chooses to static versus dynamic linking for Swift packages.
That's where I gave up, so if you have any better ideas, please let me know. At the end of the day, I don't have the energy to spend more time fighting Xcode over 20 megabytes. Oh well. I should probably throw a report into the void that is Feedback Assistant. That's where I gave up, so if you have any better ideas, please let me know. At the end of the day, I don't have the energy to spend more time fighting Xcode over 20 megabytes. Oh well. I should probably throw a report into the void that is Feedback Assistant.
**Update:** As of April 2022, I've [resolved](/2022/swift-package-framework-update/) this issue.

View File

@ -1,13 +0,0 @@
```
metadata.title = "Update: Swift Packages and Frameworks"
metadata.tags = ["swift"]
metadata.date = "2022-04-07 22:36:42 -0400"
metadata.shortDesc = ""
metadata.slug = "swift-package-framework-update"
```
A while ago I [wrote](/2022/swift-package-framework/) about some trouble I had getting Xcode to cooperate with my efforts to bring my app file size back under control after adding a new Swift Package dependency. Well, I'm happy to say I finally have: the most recent TestFlight build of Tusker has a 6.7MB install size, down from 25MB.
Ultimately I did take the route of turning my framework into a Swift Package. I revisited it because I noticed in another project that local packages inside the same folder as the main project worked perfectly fine. The only difference I found was that the project where it worked used only an `.xcodeproj`, whereas Tusker used an `.xcworkspace`. So, I deleted the (for unrelated reasons, no longer necessary) workspace and found that, after quitting and relaunching Xcode, the local package worked perfectly fine.
I briefly started writing a feedback report, but upon further testing I found that xcworkspaces in general weren't the problem—a new project and workspace worked fine. So, I gave up trying to reproduce it and assumed there was just something weird about the 3.5 year old workspace.