3 ms·
I don't understand the change of the default block parameter name. It's already _1, _2, etc. Why create yet another, backward-incompatible way? And still, they
by magic_smoke_ee 2y ago
I don't understand the change of the default block parameter name. It's already _1, _2, etc. Why create yet another, backward-incompatible way?
And still, they doom march forward with the fragmentation of rbs and sorbet/tapioca, rather than adopting in-band gradual typing like Python did.
I think the greater problem is Ruby appears to be developed by a nearly-closed small clique of people who refuse to listen to others or to reason.
- allknowingfrog 2y agoI agree that `it` is unnecessary, but I'm really confused by the push for a type system. It adds a lot of clutter to a language that optimizes for expressiveness. I would prefer to work in something like Go, which is designed to have types, rather than awkwardly patch them into Ruby.
- magic_smoke_ee 2y agoApples (dynamic language) vs. oranges (static languages). Python's gradual typing approach solved this problem similarly to TypeScript, which is the right way to do it: https://peps.python.org/pep-0483/ https://peps.python.org/pep-0483/
- allknowingfrog 2y agoIt may be less bad, but I don't think there's a right way to retroactively add a type system to a dynamic language. I generally like working in JavaScript, but I have no desire to ever see TypeScript again.