Wonder if it would be possible/useful to have the Ruby interpreter itself identify eligible functions and "crystalize" them automatically
Crystalruby ia really interesting though. This has got me wondering:
1. How this compares to Sorbet Compiler in terms of performance?
2. If you could use Sorbet or RBS type annotations to drive crystalruby?
3. How would YJIT perform if it was fed with type annotations?
4. Could crystalruby type signatures be used by Sorbet-lsp, ruby-lsp, etc in to improve developer experience?
I really wish we had a single standard for inline types in ruby. I wish that was an inline RBS type annotation but I guess I’d take anything that works.
Coming from both python and statically-typed languages, your description 100% squares up with every experience I've had with ruby
Folks are free to throw stones at the Spring Framework similarly, it's not out of bounds, but ruby seems to embrace the monkeypatch
How recent were your experiences with this? In recent years I've seen monkeypatching treated as more of an antipattern. If you are on a project where people are doing that without very good reasons, that says more about the team than the language.
How much magic is really going on, especially compared to for example JPA/Hiberbate, or any of the aspect orient projects?
Metaprogramming like looping over an array to dynamic create methods is far less common. It definitely makes me cranky when I can’t find a method definition. ORMs are one of a few exceptions where the utility justifies it.