I think that at lot of these pollute the global scope unnecessarily or incorrectly, and many of them are semantically incorrect. It&#x27;s also a massive framework that doesn&#x27;t address a specific concern. It would be better packaged as a collection of μframeworks.<p>Some specific issues:<p>&gt; Easily access your ViewController on top of your view stack:<p><pre><code>    let topOfMyViewStack = topMostVC
</code></pre>
UIKit supports an arbitrary number of windows, so &quot;your view stack&quot; is not something that is definable.<p>&gt; Easily access your screen width &amp; height:<p><pre><code>    print(screenWidth) &#x2F;&#x2F; 375.0 on iPhone6
    print(screenHeight) &#x2F;&#x2F; 667.0 on iPhone6
</code></pre>
Which screen? iOS supports multiple screens - there&#x27;s a reason that these things are scoped to instance properties of UIScreen.<p>&gt; Easily run block of code:<p><pre><code>    let myBlock = {
        print(&quot;lol&quot;)
    }
    runThisBlock(myBlock)
</code></pre>
You can just call it directly with myBlock() - which the implementation presumably does.<p>&gt; Easily convert between different types:<p><pre><code>    var myDouble = myInt.toDouble
</code></pre>
Double(myInt) isn&#x27;t really hard, and the &quot;easy&quot; version is <i>more characters</i>.<p>&gt; Easily access ViewController sizes:<p>View controllers do not have sizes - views do.<p>I don&#x27;t want to rag on the author too much, but I&#x27;d also like to add something about the tagline &quot;How Swift standard types and classes were supposed to work&quot;. This seems needlessly offensive and incorrect - in all likelihood, Chris Lattner is smarter (or at least more educated on the subject) than you - or me! There&#x27;s no need to say that he&#x27;s doing his work incorrectly. Instead, a tagline like &quot;useful extensions for the Swift Standard Library, Foundation, and UIKit&quot; wouldn&#x27;t imply that the Swift team wasn&#x27;t doing their job. Save that for complaining about the inability to define a Monad protocol.