After adding all the signatures to the codebase (full adoption), I want to be able to dump them into a .rbi file and clean up the codebase. Thus, my Ruby code stays the same: less verbose and more readable.
Nice idea, although I think it kind of beats the purpose of types annotations, because every time you need to consult or adapt two files, instead of one.
I've been thinking too whether libraries should adopt Sorbet or not. As library maintainer, I don't want to force users to install Sorbet. I wish there would be a ways to enable those typechecks only if Sorbet is already present (because parent project decided to use that, or because I'm just developing my own library).
Probably it's a matter of time before some sorbet-dummy lib comes out, which would defined methods used by Sorbet (such as sig), but does nothing and steps off when it detects that "real" Sorbet is available.
Nice idea, although I think it kind of beats the purpose of types annotations, because every time you need to consult or adapt two files, instead of one.
I've been thinking too whether libraries should adopt Sorbet or not. As library maintainer, I don't want to force users to install Sorbet. I wish there would be a ways to enable those typechecks only if Sorbet is already present (because parent project decided to use that, or because I'm just developing my own library).
Probably it's a matter of time before some
sorbet-dummylib comes out, which would defined methods used by Sorbet (such assig), but does nothing and steps off when it detects that "real" Sorbet is available.The examples make it look like you can noop it with a simple
def sig(*) end. Is that not why you defined it in the block form?