I think there's a lot of interest in this in the community. Task Rabbit, where I work, asked to be invited to the beta. I don't think most Ruby devs want a "Types First" workflow. Many of us came from Java to Ruby to get away from that. But the fact is, a ton of the production errors I've encountered over the past 10 years would be less likely with static type checking.
I think a lot of Rubyist will write the code fully dynamically and add the type annotations after the fact.
Curious how it works with code that is deliberately taking advantage of duck typing and/or metaprogramming.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
I think there's a lot of interest in this in the community. Task Rabbit, where I work, asked to be invited to the beta. I don't think most Ruby devs want a "Types First" workflow. Many of us came from Java to Ruby to get away from that. But the fact is, a ton of the production errors I've encountered over the past 10 years would be less likely with static type checking.
I think a lot of Rubyist will write the code fully dynamically and add the type annotations after the fact.
Curious how it works with code that is deliberately taking advantage of duck typing and/or metaprogramming.