I haven't tried it but it looks promising.
RubyLLM: A Ruby framework for all major AI providers
31–40 of 91 posts
Re: RubyLLM: A Ruby framework for all major AI providers
#32I have been a fan of Ruby for many years, but in this fast paced era the Ruby ecosystem always struggled with the dependency versioning. Gems I relied on were never available or compatible with the rest of the ecosystem.
Re: RubyLLM: A Ruby framework for all major AI providers
#33Why would anyone still build in dynamically typed languages in 2026? Why relinquish the crystal clear signals that static typing is able to provide to the LLM?
Even as rails dev, I am seeing that you might be right. It’s really hard to find specific pros nowadays that Ruby brings to the table. All that talk about conventions over configurations and vast presence of Rails in weights is fun, but if writing speed isn’t an issue anymore, then Ruby on Rails has serious problems with larger codebases
Re: RubyLLM: A Ruby framework for all major AI providers
#34We use and love RubyLLM! A wonderful and easy to use framework.
Agreed with another commenter on the frustration with the responses API not being naively supported; that seems like a huge miss. There is a connector from another dev, but it's buggy and not as high quality as the main gem.
Really looking forward to future development and especially 2.0!
Edit: Just saw that responses API is now native? I will definitely check that out.
Re: RubyLLM: A Ruby framework for all major AI providers
#35Why would anyone still build in dynamically typed languages in 2026? Why relinquish the crystal clear signals that static typing is able to provide to the LLM?
You static typed evangelists have lost your damn minds. You seem to have completely misunderstood what this library even is because you have some primal urge to boast static typing at every chance.
You can build high quality software with dynamically typed languages, and Ruby is an absolute dream to read and write.
Re: RubyLLM: A Ruby framework for all major AI providers
#36I found Ruby LLM to be surprisingly good - in terms of usability it's close to Vercel's AI framework. It tries to strike a balance between working out of the box and being flexible... which has its challenges, still nice overall. One big real-life pain I experienced is that caches don't always work, e.g. for xAI, since it only supports completions API and thought signatures are returned wrong.
[flagged]
Re: RubyLLM: A Ruby framework for all major AI providers
#37Why would anyone still build in dynamically typed languages in 2026? Why relinquish the crystal clear signals that static typing is able to provide to the LLM?
Even as rails dev, I am seeing that you might be right. It’s really hard to find specific pros nowadays that Ruby brings to the table. All that talk about conventions over configurations and vast presence of Rails in weights is fun, but if writing speed isn’t an issue anymore, then Ruby on Rails has serious problems with larger codebases
Codebases like Stripe?
Re: RubyLLM: A Ruby framework for all major AI providers
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hi! Valid challenge, I am probably misremembering. We were playing with various 'one-interface to all providers' solutions and I might have mixed up RubyLLM there. Sorry for that. I will have a deep dive into which things I felt we needed to adapt per provider. I didn't mean to imply that you have to solve all of our wants of course. One thing we did do was monkey-patch the spot where tool_calls are performed by Ruby…
Interesting! What were you guys trying to achieve by running them in your own tool harness?
We had already implemented tool_calls in our own database and have a system that executes them and creates our conversation array, etc. So we wanted to leverage the providers that RubyLLM supports without having to change the tool execution in our platform.
Re: RubyLLM: A Ruby framework for all major AI providers
#39We use and love RubyLLM! A wonderful and easy to use framework. Agreed with another commenter on the frustration with the responses API not being naively supported; that seems like a huge miss. There is a connector from another dev, but it's buggy and not as high quality as the main gem. Really looking forward to future development and especially 2.0! Edit: Just saw that responses API is now native? I will definitely…
Thank you!
Since a few mentioned Responses API: the reason why it wasn't implemented in 1.x is because RubyLLM 1.x effectively assumes a 1:1 mapping between provider and protocol. That assumption no longer holds since OpenAI has 2 protocols with different capabilities, and to access all VertexAI models we need to support a bunch under that single provider.
Therefore, a major refactoring to split Protocols and from Providers was needed, as well as a way to route different models to different Protocols under the same Provider, transparently.
That's one of the many things that's gonna ship with RubyLLM 2.0.
If you're curious: https://github.com/crmne/ruby_llm/commit/d398354da493570b050... https://github.com/crmne/ruby_llm/commit/0875ce2dfeae9d28a3a...
Re: RubyLLM: A Ruby framework for all major AI providers
#40I have created an open source chatgpt clone with rubyllm, check it out here: https://www.railschat.org/
tried it and got this:
> Error: You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits. To monitor your current usage, head to: https://ai.dev/rate-limit. * Quota exceeded for metric: generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_content_free_tier_requests, limit: 20, model: gemini-2.5-flash Please retry in 41.543129369s.