3 ms·
If you're writing tests that test for that I think you've missed the point entirely of testing. I hope you don't think the typechecker works for logic?
by gregors 3y ago
If you're writing tests that test for that I think you've missed the point entirely of testing. I hope you don't think the typechecker works for logic?
- vinceguidry 3y agoSeriously, just introduce type contracts or a full static type system. Ruby has both.
- dham 3y agoYea devs just don't understand that Ruby is strongly typed. In fact, it's the most strongly typed language out there besides Scala. It's just not statically typed.
- Gigachad 3y agoThat does nothing for the fact that gem authors regularly change things without warning and you can’t tell until the code is run. Something a type checker trivially solves for you.
- vinceguidry 3y agoShould be caught easily with regular unit/integration tests. And again, ruby has static type system, you just have to use it.