Earlier quoted context omitted.
RBS is optional.
It won't be optional in Ruby 4, most likely.
Seems unlikely. Ruby is all about options.
Ruby 3.0 Preview 1
31–40 of 207 posts
Re: Ruby 3.0 Preview 1
#32Question: will the nonblocking scheduler start to make Ruby concurrency competitive with e.g. Node.js and Go? Currently Ruby mostly uses heavyweight threading mechanisms that cause trouble for I/O-bound microservices.
In theory the scheduler should be similar to NodeJS and Ractor should be similar to Go if they’re both applied correctly.
Re: Ruby 3.0 Preview 1
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here's schneems, a Puma maintainer, talking about Ractor, Rails, and Puma https://old.reddit.com/r/ruby/comments/ivasiq/we_made_puma_f...
>The biggest issue with ractor support as it stands today would really be getting ALL the libraries any given app uses to support the ractor design. I wonder if this will create a chicken-egg situation. Without significant Ractor adoption it will be hard to get libraries to adapt. Without essential pieces like Puma supporting (and benefiting from) Ractor there is less reason to for apps to use Ractor. I am reminded o…
I imagine getting wide support for Ractor will be easier than Rubinius and other async Ruby attempts since it’s actually part of the core language.
Re: Ruby 3.0 Preview 1
#34So now there are basically no dynamically typed languages left. There's Scheme, JavaScript, what else? All languages nowadays are converging to TypeScript/Rust. It's kind of sad.
I hear x86 is dynamically typed
Re: Ruby 3.0 Preview 1
#35My thoughts: - RBS: meh... might get more useful in the future (in 2-5 years maybe). - Ractor: Wohooo! I'm writing a DAG library where I was thinking of implementing something like this, good to know I can use it and get real parallelism on top. - Scheduler: :shrug: don't know about this one, might be relevant with future concurrent ruby code, any ideas? - Rightward assignment: it's a bit awkward but I see the use ca…
> - Endless method: this one is cute, I love it!
It's a weird name for it. It should probably be called something like 'equational method definitions'
Re: Ruby 3.0 Preview 1
#36>Rightward assignment statement is added. >fib(10) => x This is exactly the kind of stuff I hated when I had to work with ruby in my last gig and why I will never accept a job using it again - soo many pointless and inconsistent ways to do the same thing ... they have method aliases for collection operations like map/filter in standard library ! .NET went with non-standard SQL-like names (select/where) and I'm not a…
I love Ruby, but I agree with you about disliking that kind of thing.
I've done Ruby since 2014 or so at a few shops. My general anecdotal experience:
- Lone Ruby coders often use a lot of that cutesy/obscure/dense stuff.
- Teams of people writing Ruby, with healthy code review practices, tend to value simple, easy-to-read Ruby.
- A lot of Popular Ruby gems (and projects at aforementioned Ruby shops) have Rubocop-based style guides. Rubocop has some very strict ideas about Ruby coding style. The defaults are mostly quite sane and it's easy to disable/customize the ones you disagree with.
Not making excuses for some of the more florid parts of Ruby's syntax and stdlib, but in practice I do find things are manageable!
Re: Ruby 3.0 Preview 1
#37My thoughts: - RBS: meh... might get more useful in the future (in 2-5 years maybe). - Ractor: Wohooo! I'm writing a DAG library where I was thinking of implementing something like this, good to know I can use it and get real parallelism on top. - Scheduler: :shrug: don't know about this one, might be relevant with future concurrent ruby code, any ideas? - Rightward assignment: it's a bit awkward but I see the use ca…
My thoughts:
- A Ruby "Preview 1" release? Oh crap, I have to start Christmas shopping soon.
Re: Ruby 3.0 Preview 1
#38Re: Ruby 3.0 Preview 1
#39I really wish Ruby would grow up and deprecate method_missing
Metaprogramming is an important part of ruby, so method_missing stays.