re: Please stop using Ruby VIEW POST


Because Ruby's semantics defy almost any kind of static analysis where a user of another language could add a type constraint

I will leave it here:


Looks like Javascript+Flow to me, which is by far not as capable as Typescript. I love Ruby, but typing is a language feature and does not belong into a library. IMHO. Hope Ruby 3.x will come with optional typing.


This will not happen. I saw a quote from Matz that he believes that type signature will be obsolete in 10 years and he doesn't want to add them (I will need time to find it). Important: he didn't say that he against static types (he is for it), he didn't say he against static analysis (he is for it).

The second point, nobody wants to repeat the Python2 vs Python3 situation, so it will be a gradual type system (I guess).

Javascript+Flow to me, which is by far not as capable as Typescript

I'm doing a series of blog posts on Flow and TypeScript. There are, for sure, differences, but not so dramatic. The biggest issue with Flow is closed development, awful tooling and not very big community, but not the power of the type system itself. It is fairly comparable to TypeScript.

code of conduct - report abuse