Re: Ruby3 Will Have Types

Looks like Ruby is becoming Human unfriendly and computer friendly.

On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 2:11 PM Gerald Bauer <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hello,
>
>    Today's biggest (most upvoted) story on Hacker News:
>
>    Ruby3 Will Have Types [1]
>
>    Any comments or thoughts here on ruby-talk about the breaking news?
>
>   Here are my two cents:
>
>   As a head start you can add the missing Bool type today :-), use the
> safebool library / gem [2]
>
>    Sorbet is a great inspiring project. Hopefully, open source soon.
> FYI: sruby - that is (secure) ruby [3] - is an alternative ruby
> (subset) with an alternative (optional) type annotation syntax e.g.
>
>    Sorbet's `sig {params(x: Integer).returns(String)}`
>
>   becomes
>
>   `sig [Integer] => [String]` or `sig Integer => String`
>
> Note: Since the sig is "yes, it's just (regular) ruby" code you can
> create an alias for types e.g. I = Integer, S = String and than use
> sig I=>S, for example.
>
>    Cheers. Prost. Happy (type-safe) coding with ruby.
>
> [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19697405
> [2] https://github.com/s6ruby/safebool
> [3] https://github.com/s6ruby
>
> Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
> <http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-talk>
>


-- 
Karthikeyan A K

Author of http://i-love-ruby.gitlab.io/


Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-talk>