That was probably only true 6–10 years ago. Migrations are a solved problem in Django and I can only think of one very obscure query that I couldn't get done in the ORM and had to drop into raw SQL. Aggregations, annotations and other query expressions in general have lifted the ORM to a truly strong position
Where are my scopes? Where's the equivalent of strong_migrations? The equivalent of db_consistency? Where are delegate attributes? Concerns? Arel?
The ORM isn't bad I'll admit that but some complex features are tedious.
I've never used rspec but it sounds like pytest and hypothesis would do the job. In ruby there's no hope for pytorch / tensorflow / ray / numba.
Rails is a Web Framework. I don't understand the point about ML. Those categories are totally different. I guess it might be a tiny plus, but not very practical. Going this route one might conclude that game studios should build Websites in C++?
Sorry it really does not, having factorybot + rspec + rspec-mocks really is a super power when it comes in testing.
The issue is that most of the time I land on a django project, it has really poor testing whereas most of the time I land on a Rails project, it has very close to complete testing. The reason is that the tests are more tedious to write.
And this culture trickles down to your dependencies as well. Anything you install with rails is almost guaranteed to have the upmost quality of testing.
Have a look on the examples here https://github.com/rspec/rspec-mocks
pytorch: https://github.com/ankane/torch.rb Tensorflow: https://github.com/ankane/tensorflow-ruby
Still, no information how they are better than the migrations in Rails?
Yeah there's less magic I give you that, but also because it does much less.
Also for me the Python packages are a minus, they are usually not tested very well and it's very easy to burn yourself when migrating (good luck finding some equivalent of rspec)