Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

wiseowise

No static typing would be a good dealbreaker for us.

View on HN

Ruby has static type system built into the language.

https://github.com/ruby/rbs

There are others you can use if you like.

Unusable mess.

Ruby should take lessons from Python and TS on how to make proper gradual typing.

I think a much better way forward is proposed by Jake Zimmerman[1] of the Sorbet team. That is to allow the runtime to parse RBS inline format comments.

That retains Sorbet’s fast static checker and its runtime checks which Typescript compiled to JS lacks.

1. https://blog.jez.io/history-of-sorbet-syntax/

It should stay true to itself and not do it at all.

Sigh - all languages needn't converge into Grey Goo.

steep and rbs don't work so well and are the wrong approach. sorbet is also the wrong approach but it works better. The Python 2 -> 3 way would've been a better way to do it but Matz chose an unwise way (separate files) that doomed it combined with a failure to type all the things and make it work. Oh, and very few Ruby gems are cryptographically signed and so most code is mostly untrustworthy. Making important things optional makes them unused and essentially worthless.

All of these problems are worse in javascript.

> a failure to type all the things and make it work

Everything is typed in Ruby.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com