6 ms·

is ruby dead?

by mdev23 3y ago

is ruby dead?

bdcravens 3y ago
Not dead, but more opportunities in Javascript and Python.
mepian 3y ago
Maybe we should stop trying to bury any technology that is not the latest hotness.
gregors 3y ago
Ruby and Rails is still awesome!
phendrenad2 3y ago
It's dead for new development, and dying as a legacy language. Not many people are using Ruby for new development, they've all moved on to Node/React. And most people who have RoR apps are looking to rewrite them in Node/React.
maxfurman 3y ago
Nope! It's alive and well both at giants like Shopify and at smaller orgs like my own.
- smohare 3y ago
  [dead]
mlambie 3y ago
No, it’s got an active community and fresh developments, so it’s definitely not dead. The concurrency story is/was poor, so some people left Ruby but many remain and many still join.
- quechimba 3y ago
  Ruby is really good at concurrency now with non-blocking fibers. https://github.com/socketry/async https://github.com/socketry/async makes it really easy to use.
dkarl 3y ago
The answer to your question is "no," because there are a significant number of people who feel that they are more productive in Ruby than in any other language. My organization has a large repository of Ruby scripts for doing manual tasks, created by somebody who felt exactly that way. It's unfortunate for my company, because it would have been better if this functionality had been incorporated in our Scala services codebase, but it gives me the perspective of having used Ruby and Scala in the same system, on the same problems. My personal opinion, predating this experience but strengthened by it, is that dynamically typed languages have lost most if not all of their appeal in the face of improvements to statically typed languages. In the 2000s, I often used the escape hatch of Boost Python and Jython to make myself more productive when working with C++ and Java codebases. I could get things done so much faster in Python that it was worth the awkwardness of dealing with language interop. These days, I don't bother. I can write quick, small, readable scripts in the same statically typed language that I use for large-scale programming.
- nitrogen 3y ago
  ActiveRecord is Ruby's nigh unassailable superpower for webdev. A few jobs back my last act in that role was moving all DB access from a separate Scala microservice into a Rails minilith, saving many, many lines of code and network round trips.
  - diordiderot 3y ago
    > ActiveRecord is Ruby's nigh unassailable superpower for webdev Django guy here so unaware, what makes it so great?
    - smohare 3y ago
      [dead]
    - JodieBenitez 3y ago
      Ditto... I really enjoy Django's ORM (makes the trivial tasks dead-easy and steps out of the way when needed) and would like to know if it can be even better by borrowing ideas from ActiveRecord.
ransom1538 3y ago
Grep for ruby on any hacker news whos hiring posts.
cloverich 3y ago
As someone with a lot of experience in other languages who joined a ruby shop, imho its best use is for teams that already know and like it. Its at a few thriving companies so it wont die anytime soon, but i dont personally think its a good choice otherwise. Mostly because i think types, more robust error handling, or the wider ecosystem (ex python, js) that other languages provide offer more avenues for professional development and ways to reuse / extend language expertise.
ufmace 3y ago
Nah. It's not as "cool" as it used to be, but IMO Rails is still the best around at banging out a decent web app with a moderate amount of functionality and traffic. It still has better integration with front-end side than any other backend framework out there, including the ones in the cool new languages.
afavour 3y ago
Definitely not dead. But if were a new software engineer trying to work out what language I should pick up next Ruby would be pretty far down the list these days.
- Gigachad 3y ago
  It's alive in the way PHP is alive. It has so much stuff built on it that it will be around for a long time. But I don't feel Ruby is a good choice for projects anymore. The failure of bringing types in to the language has really doomed it. Pretty much all cases you might consider using Ruby, TypeScript is a better choice. I have been doing Rails for the last 8 years but it's really showing it's age. Constant issues in our app that TypeScript would have caught, along with pretty dismal support for advanced editor features you see with typed languages.
  - dham 3y ago
    We just looked at our options at work and landed back on Rails. The problem is the Javascript ecosystem is just bad for any project that needs to live for more than a year. The database libraries changes every 6 months, stuff is just constantly rewritten over and over. I agree that Typescript is nice but the eco system is awful. If you want a batteries included framework, that is used at scale, has a lot of history behind it, and doesn't churn every 6 months, there are only a few that you can use. Rails is one.
  - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3y ago
    Are you familiar with rbs (https://github.com/ruby/rbs https://github.com/ruby/rbs)? If so, what issues do you see with using that over TypeScript?
    - Gigachad 3y ago
      We looked in to it and it didn’t seem usable with Rails. DHH has also made comments on Twitter that he is strongly against adding type support to rails. I’m also yet to encounter a gem which has types. While basically every single npm package is TS now.
pmontra 3y ago
Strictly speaking this doesn't answer to the spirit of the question but... I'm currently making money by working at Rails and Django projects started by my customers years ago. Rails' ones are systematically in a better shape than Django ones. I'd say that either Rails or Ruby or both are structurally better than the Django / Python pair at delivering sound and maintainable projects.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3y ago
  I remember an argument made in the context of a Stackoverflow blog post (one of the "which programming language do people use/like the most/least") that Ruby/Rails was dropping off in popularity because it was becoming more common for a new developer to have to work on the "legacy" Rails application (and therefore dislike it because they have difficulty understanding it the same as any application one didn't design themselves). That seems to track with this if a Rails application is actually more likely to become "legacy" but it could also be the same for Python/Django. I just remember the Ruby/Rails point in particular because that's primarily what I work on.
jes5199 3y ago
objectively no, but compared to what it was like in 2007...

is ruby dead?

by mdev23 3y ago

is ruby dead?

bdcravens 3y ago

Not dead, but more opportunities in Javascript and Python.

mepian 3y ago

Maybe we should stop trying to bury any technology that is not the latest hotness.

gregors 3y ago

Ruby and Rails is still awesome!

phendrenad2 3y ago

It's dead for new development, and dying as a legacy language. Not many people are using Ruby for new development, they've all moved on to Node/React. And most people who have RoR apps are looking to rewrite them in Node/React.

maxfurman 3y ago

Nope! It's alive and well both at giants like Shopify and at smaller orgs like my own.

smohare 3y ago
[dead]

mlambie 3y ago

No, it’s got an active community and fresh developments, so it’s definitely not dead. The concurrency story is/was poor, so some people left Ruby but many remain and many still join.

quechimba 3y ago
Ruby is really good at concurrency now with non-blocking fibers. https://github.com/socketry/async https://github.com/socketry/async makes it really easy to use.

dkarl 3y ago

The answer to your question is "no," because there are a significant number of people who feel that they are more productive in Ruby than in any other language. My organization has a large repository of Ruby scripts for doing manual tasks, created by somebody who felt exactly that way. It's unfortunate for my company, because it would have been better if this functionality had been incorporated in our Scala services codebase, but it gives me the perspective of having used Ruby and Scala in the same system, on the same problems. My personal opinion, predating this experience but strengthened by it, is that dynamically typed languages have lost most if not all of their appeal in the face of improvements to statically typed languages. In the 2000s, I often used the escape hatch of Boost Python and Jython to make myself more productive when working with C++ and Java codebases. I could get things done so much faster in Python that it was worth the awkwardness of dealing with language interop. These days, I don't bother. I can write quick, small, readable scripts in the same statically typed language that I use for large-scale programming.

nitrogen 3y ago
ActiveRecord is Ruby's nigh unassailable superpower for webdev. A few jobs back my last act in that role was moving all DB access from a separate Scala microservice into a Rails minilith, saving many, many lines of code and network round trips.
- diordiderot 3y ago
  > ActiveRecord is Ruby's nigh unassailable superpower for webdev Django guy here so unaware, what makes it so great?
  - smohare 3y ago
    [dead]
  - JodieBenitez 3y ago
    Ditto... I really enjoy Django's ORM (makes the trivial tasks dead-easy and steps out of the way when needed) and would like to know if it can be even better by borrowing ideas from ActiveRecord.

ransom1538 3y ago

Grep for ruby on any hacker news whos hiring posts.

cloverich 3y ago

As someone with a lot of experience in other languages who joined a ruby shop, imho its best use is for teams that already know and like it. Its at a few thriving companies so it wont die anytime soon, but i dont personally think its a good choice otherwise. Mostly because i think types, more robust error handling, or the wider ecosystem (ex python, js) that other languages provide offer more avenues for professional development and ways to reuse / extend language expertise.

ufmace 3y ago

Nah. It's not as "cool" as it used to be, but IMO Rails is still the best around at banging out a decent web app with a moderate amount of functionality and traffic. It still has better integration with front-end side than any other backend framework out there, including the ones in the cool new languages.

afavour 3y ago

Definitely not dead. But if were a new software engineer trying to work out what language I should pick up next Ruby would be pretty far down the list these days.

Gigachad 3y ago
It's alive in the way PHP is alive. It has so much stuff built on it that it will be around for a long time. But I don't feel Ruby is a good choice for projects anymore. The failure of bringing types in to the language has really doomed it. Pretty much all cases you might consider using Ruby, TypeScript is a better choice. I have been doing Rails for the last 8 years but it's really showing it's age. Constant issues in our app that TypeScript would have caught, along with pretty dismal support for advanced editor features you see with typed languages.
- dham 3y ago
  We just looked at our options at work and landed back on Rails. The problem is the Javascript ecosystem is just bad for any project that needs to live for more than a year. The database libraries changes every 6 months, stuff is just constantly rewritten over and over. I agree that Typescript is nice but the eco system is awful. If you want a batteries included framework, that is used at scale, has a lot of history behind it, and doesn't churn every 6 months, there are only a few that you can use. Rails is one.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3y ago
  Are you familiar with rbs (https://github.com/ruby/rbs https://github.com/ruby/rbs)? If so, what issues do you see with using that over TypeScript?
  - Gigachad 3y ago
    We looked in to it and it didn’t seem usable with Rails. DHH has also made comments on Twitter that he is strongly against adding type support to rails. I’m also yet to encounter a gem which has types. While basically every single npm package is TS now.

pmontra 3y ago

Strictly speaking this doesn't answer to the spirit of the question but... I'm currently making money by working at Rails and Django projects started by my customers years ago. Rails' ones are systematically in a better shape than Django ones. I'd say that either Rails or Ruby or both are structurally better than the Django / Python pair at delivering sound and maintainable projects.

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3y ago
I remember an argument made in the context of a Stackoverflow blog post (one of the "which programming language do people use/like the most/least") that Ruby/Rails was dropping off in popularity because it was becoming more common for a new developer to have to work on the "legacy" Rails application (and therefore dislike it because they have difficulty understanding it the same as any application one didn't design themselves). That seems to track with this if a Rails application is actually more likely to become "legacy" but it could also be the same for Python/Django. I just remember the Ruby/Rails point in particular because that's primarily what I work on.

jes5199 3y ago

objectively no, but compared to what it was like in 2007...