3 ms·

Ruby has types.

• nicce 2y ago
  In runtime. Basically you lose most of the benefits.
  • fulafel 2y ago
    Before lightly using this argument I recommend using a language that really doesn't have types. The difference between getting your errors at runtime / compile time is much much smaller than the difference between those and not getting errors at all.
    • lelanthran 2y ago
      > Before lightly using this argument I recommend using a language that really doesn't have types. I am curious now: which language doesn't have types but has a separate compile-time?
      • fulafel 2y ago
        I don't know that having separate compile-time is relevant for the experience. But Forth, assembler, B and BCPL. TCL also seems to have a compiler: https://www.tcl.tk/software/tclpro/compiler.html https://www.tcl.tk/software/tclpro/compiler.html
  • mattmcknight 2y ago
    Not just at runtime.
• jitl 2y ago
  Whenever I google to see if people are enjoying Sorbet or RBS I find articles like this that basically say “no, no one seems to be enjoying this and it’s going nowhere” https://brandur.org/fragments/ruby-typing-2024 https://brandur.org/fragments/ruby-typing-2024 In my opinion RBS files are a horrible design decision and split the Ruby community between a typing system that people actually want to use (Sorbet) and a typing system we’ll tolerate because it’s official but a pain in the ass (RBS), leaving both ecosystems to whither. Sad :-(