3 ms·
I mean, the most obvious solution would just be to unify Ruby's basic syntax with the RBS syntax shown in the OP. This format already looks like a Ruby class de
by chc 6y ago
I mean, the most obvious solution would just be to unify Ruby's basic syntax with the RBS syntax shown in the OP. This format already looks like a Ruby class definition with the method bodies omitted and some simple "-> type" and ": type" syntax added. I think that's why people find the separation confusing.
- dragonwriter 6y ago> This format already looks like a Ruby class definition with the method bodies omitted and some simple "-> type" and ": type" syntax added The thing is that much of it is perfectly valid Ruby code with wildly different semantics already, so, no, without breaking a lot, you can't unify it with Ruby syntax.