News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on InfoQ Interview: Rich Kilmer on the Power of Ruby. Parent comment

Re:InfoQ Interview: Rich Kilmer on the Power of Ruby by gregors on Thursday June 15, 2023 @09:51AM (#36340506)
If you're writing tests that test for that I think you've missed the point entirely of testing. I hope you don't think the typechecker works for logic?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:InfoQ Interview: Rich Kilmer on the Power of Ruby by vinceguidry on Thursday June 15, 2023 @11:25AM (#36341879)
Seriously, just introduce type contracts or a full static type system. Ruby has both.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:InfoQ Interview: Rich Kilmer on the Power of Ruby by dham on Thursday June 15, 2023 @06:22PM (#36347468)
Yea devs just don't understand that Ruby is strongly typed. In fact, it's the most strongly typed language out there besides Scala. It's just not statically typed.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:InfoQ Interview: Rich Kilmer on the Power of Ruby by Gigachad on Thursday June 15, 2023 @07:09PM (#36348113)
That does nothing for the fact that gem authors regularly change things without warning and you can’t tell until the code is run. Something a type checker trivially solves for you.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:InfoQ Interview: Rich Kilmer on the Power of Ruby by vinceguidry on Friday June 16, 2023 @02:14PM (#36361191)
Should be caught easily with regular unit/integration tests. And again, ruby has static type system, you just have to use it.
[ Parent | on HN ]