4 ms·

So I'm a Ruby fan and I largely agree with you. I started dicking around with Stable Diffusion recently and was almost immediately reminded of so many things I

So I'm a Ruby fan and I largely agree with you. I started dicking around with Stable Diffusion recently and was almost immediately reminded of so many things I dislike about Python. But just to be a bit contrary: - I don't see a huge value in symbols. In Ruby they are literally just static strings which means they use memory you'll never get back – potentially important if you're e.g. parsing something large into a hash and symbolizing the keys. If you have to put a non-alphanumeric character in a symbol you still need to use quotes. - Procs, blocks, and lambdas – yes. - Metaprogramming and monkey patching? dfjasdjldfjkdfjlkfdjldfoh4houfhufl. A double edged sword at best and 100% not something I'd want to see in a larger codebase. Javascript folks largely learned this lesson with the shift from Prototype to jQuery. You can do some really neat-o things but they're almost always unintuitive to the uninitiated.

rco8786 4y ago
Monkey patching I agree with but IMO it's unfair to lump metaprogramming into that same bucket.
djur 4y ago
You can dynamically create symbols and expect them to be garbage collected as of Ruby 2.2. They only become "immortal" if you use them to define a method, instance variable, or constant. So the common use case of hash keys is fine. One important advantage of symbols versus strings is that Symbol#== is constant time.
- inferiorhuman 4y ago
  Ah hah, you've discovered how long it's been since I've thought about Ruby performance. One important advantage of symbols versus strings is that Symbol#== is constant time. At that point though why not use integer constants?
  - knodi123 4y ago
    syntactic sugar- you don't have to pre-declare them or worry about conflicting values. And occasionally the symbol.to_s method is useful in logging or whatnot. That's pretty much it.
chillfox 4y ago
I think monkey patching is a nice tool to have. I once had to deal with a vendor provided gem that assumed the product was configured in a specific way (it was not) deep in an internal method. Patching that one method was all I needed to do to get it working.
- knodi123 4y ago
  exactly. And when writing a test suite, I monkey-patch at will, which makes it sooo much easier to have self-contained tests without side effects or complicated dependencies.
philsnow 4y ago
> A double edged sword at best and 100% not something I'd want to see in a larger codebase. the real footgun is dependencies that monkey patch things you don't know about / don't expect, and then the order you require those dependencies becomes important. augughghhhhh I hate that part.

rco8786 4y ago

Monkey patching I agree with but IMO it's unfair to lump metaprogramming into that same bucket.

djur 4y ago

You can dynamically create symbols and expect them to be garbage collected as of Ruby 2.2. They only become "immortal" if you use them to define a method, instance variable, or constant. So the common use case of hash keys is fine. One important advantage of symbols versus strings is that Symbol#== is constant time.

inferiorhuman 4y ago
Ah hah, you've discovered how long it's been since I've thought about Ruby performance. One important advantage of symbols versus strings is that Symbol#== is constant time. At that point though why not use integer constants?
- knodi123 4y ago
  syntactic sugar- you don't have to pre-declare them or worry about conflicting values. And occasionally the symbol.to_s method is useful in logging or whatnot. That's pretty much it.

chillfox 4y ago

I think monkey patching is a nice tool to have. I once had to deal with a vendor provided gem that assumed the product was configured in a specific way (it was not) deep in an internal method. Patching that one method was all I needed to do to get it working.

knodi123 4y ago
exactly. And when writing a test suite, I monkey-patch at will, which makes it sooo much easier to have self-contained tests without side effects or complicated dependencies.

philsnow 4y ago

> A double edged sword at best and 100% not something I'd want to see in a larger codebase. the real footgun is dependencies that monkey patch things you don't know about / don't expect, and then the order you require those dependencies becomes important. augughghhhhh I hate that part.