I find that the two languages are actually not as dissimilar as you may be led to believe. You can write your Ruby a bit more like Java (use more plain old clas

I find that the two languages are actually not as dissimilar as you may be led to believe. You can write your Ruby a bit more like Java (use more plain old class objects for most of your business logic, and wrap usage of the heftier DSLs/gems inside of simpler interfaces), and support it with the same kind of tests (which are now easier to write & maintain because your code's concerns are more isolated). Sure, you miss out on the type checking, but I'm not sure that is as painful as it sounds when you remove many of the other factors it can be easy to fall into with Ruby. The key here is that, while Ruby lends itself to building DSLs layered within DSLs (I'm looking at you, Rails), you don't have to use it that way. And, I'd argue, when you reach a point where your Ruby looks a bit more Java- or C#-esque, the more "truthy"/"safy" aspects of static typing end up playing a much smaller role than it seems from the outset.