5 ms·
I don't know why anyone would want to code with a language that isn't statically type safe at compile time in this day and age.
by xyzzy4747 2y ago
I don't know why anyone would want to code with a language that isn't statically type safe at compile time in this day and age.
- kstrauser 2y agoI don't know if I'd admit that publicly, without first reading about it and trying to understand why things like RoR and Python have huge, loyal user bases.
- Alifatisk 2y agoDoesn’t tools like Sorbet and RBS help?
- xyzzy4747 2y agoWhy use a 3rd party add-on solution instead of using something better in the first place?
- ricketycricket 2y agoYou mean like Typescript, an add-on that transpiles to Javascript?
- askonomm 2y agoI'm sure they meant an actual statically typed language. I agree that dynamic languages are fun and productive ... until the codebase becomes big and complex, and then not knowing what shape any data is quickly becomes a nightmare to understand and debug.
- Alifatisk 2y ago> not knowing what shape any data is quickly becomes a nightmare to understand and debug I remember when I experienced exactly this, it kind of flipped switch in my head which made me love static typing.
- Alifatisk 2y agoRBS comes by default with Ruby, Sorbet is 3rd party.
- aaronbrethorst 2y agoMight be worth spending 30 minutes watching a video of what you can build with Rails in that amount of time instead of smugly dismissing it. There’s a great example on the home page here: https://rubyonrails.org/ https://rubyonrails.org/
- xyzzy4747 2y agoI've used it before, but Next.js with TypeScript is much superior in many different ways.
- clivestaples 2y agoHonest question: Where do you deploy? What do you use for queues? Database? It's impossible to beat React for component libraries but, lemme tell you, I've struggled to be productive with Next when compared to Rails.
- osbre 2y agoThat is why I use Laravel btw