4 ms·

The fact that all static languages are adding an Any type means the discussion is settled. Lol. How has this settled anything? You think Ruby devs from now on a

The fact that all static languages are adding an Any type means the discussion is settled. Lol. How has this settled anything? You think Ruby devs from now on are all gonna use Sorbet or RBS? I highly doubt it. Some very unique companies like Shopify or Github, which don't really represent the average Ruby shop, may make a limited use of these tools. The vast majority won't.

pjmlp 6y ago
Actually they are catching up with Algol features.
stewbrew 6y ago
Okay you convinced me to stick with my assessment of ruby. I regret every single time I have chosen to write something in ruby. I guess this release won't change that if nobody uses these features.
- joelbluminator 6y ago
  No, it won't. If you don't like it you don't like it, it's alright. I'm not trying to convince anyone to do anything most of the time, stick to what makes you happy and productive.
- cercatrova 6y ago
  Then don't write in Ruby, write in what you want.
pdimitar 6y ago
They add an "Any" type because they have no choice, what are you on about? You can't change a dynamic language to a statically typed language overnight. Or over a year. Or five. You are not furthering your argument, you are just reasserting the status quo.
theon144 6y ago
>The fact that all static languages are adding an Any type means the discussion is settled. They really aren't, though. No statically typed languages which started off as such, to my knowledge, have added an Any type (casting magic notwithstanding). You must be thinking of TypeScript and other "gradually typed" languages, where it's a necessity for interop with existing code. The rest of your comment, unfortunately, does not really put forth any coherent argument, so I would tend to weakly agree with the parent comment.
- joelbluminator 6y ago
  I meant C# dynamic type actually. So I was wrong to mention Any.
  - pjmlp 6y ago
    Which was added to support COM variant types as main goal, and as side effect of trying to make the CLR a good target for Python and Ruby, an effort that has mostly died and is kept around just for backwards compatibility.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - joelbluminator 6y ago
      Quick Google shows this thing is still being used, for quite a few use cases. Maybe it's not super popular but what do u base it dying out on? https://code-maze.com/advanced-csharp-dynamic-type/#whyusedynamic https://code-maze.com/advanced-csharp-dynamic-type/#whyusedy...
      - pjmlp 6y ago
        Its current support in .NET Core and closed issues with won't fix. https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/discussions/158 https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/discussions/158

pjmlp 6y ago

Actually they are catching up with Algol features.

stewbrew 6y ago

Okay you convinced me to stick with my assessment of ruby. I regret every single time I have chosen to write something in ruby. I guess this release won't change that if nobody uses these features.

joelbluminator 6y ago
No, it won't. If you don't like it you don't like it, it's alright. I'm not trying to convince anyone to do anything most of the time, stick to what makes you happy and productive.
cercatrova 6y ago
Then don't write in Ruby, write in what you want.

pdimitar 6y ago

They add an "Any" type because they have no choice, what are you on about? You can't change a dynamic language to a statically typed language overnight. Or over a year. Or five. You are not furthering your argument, you are just reasserting the status quo.

theon144 6y ago

>The fact that all static languages are adding an Any type means the discussion is settled. They really aren't, though. No statically typed languages which started off as such, to my knowledge, have added an Any type (casting magic notwithstanding). You must be thinking of TypeScript and other "gradually typed" languages, where it's a necessity for interop with existing code. The rest of your comment, unfortunately, does not really put forth any coherent argument, so I would tend to weakly agree with the parent comment.

joelbluminator 6y ago
I meant C# dynamic type actually. So I was wrong to mention Any.
- pjmlp 6y ago
  Which was added to support COM variant types as main goal, and as side effect of trying to make the CLR a good target for Python and Ruby, an effort that has mostly died and is kept around just for backwards compatibility.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - joelbluminator 6y ago
    Quick Google shows this thing is still being used, for quite a few use cases. Maybe it's not super popular but what do u base it dying out on? https://code-maze.com/advanced-csharp-dynamic-type/#whyusedynamic https://code-maze.com/advanced-csharp-dynamic-type/#whyusedy...
    - pjmlp 6y ago
      Its current support in .NET Core and closed issues with won't fix. https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/discussions/158 https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/discussions/158