6 ms·

Why would anyone still build in dynamically typed languages in 2026? Why relinquish the crystal clear signals that static typing is able to provide to the LLM?

jimbokun 3mo ago
This is not a tool for using LLMs to write Ruby code.
- notpachet 3mo ago
  No, it's just a tool someone posted that's written in Ruby, with a strong signal that the authors are LLM proponents. It could have been a todo list and I'd still have the same question.
taylorlapeyre 3mo ago
Well, LLMs have an obscene amount of context built into their weights about Ruby on Rails, and can work within it extremely quickly.
lackoftactics 3mo ago
Even as rails dev, I am seeing that you might be right. It’s really hard to find specific pros nowadays that Ruby brings to the table. All that talk about conventions over configurations and vast presence of Rails in weights is fun, but if writing speed isn’t an issue anymore, then Ruby on Rails has serious problems with larger codebases
- cutler 3mo ago
  Codebases like Stripe?
  - lackoftactics 3mo ago
    they introduced static typing (Sorbet) to avoid problems, it's completely different app and looks nowhere close to what you experience in standard Rails app
    - cutler 3mo ago
      AirBnB.
MitziMoto 3mo ago
You static typed evangelists have lost your damn minds. You seem to have completely misunderstood what this library even is because you have some primal urge to boast static typing at every chance. You can build high quality software with dynamically typed languages, and Ruby is an absolute dream to read and write.
- lackoftactics 3mo ago
  Why do you think that follows? I was on team dynamic typing for about 12 years, and Ruby was a big part of that. I still think dynamic languages can be wonderful to read and write. But after using modern statically typed languages with good inference, I changed my mind. Many of my old objections were really objections to verbose type systems, not static typing itself. With inference, you can keep a lot of the readability while gaining safer refactoring, better tooling, and earlier feedback. That doesn’t mean dynamic languages can’t produce high-quality software. They obviously can. But I don’t think appreciating modern static typing is just evangelism. And yes, I understand what this library is about, it's for "beautiful" easy to use interface to AI providers for Ruby apps. It's the popular play nowadays with litellm, bifrost, gomodel and vercel gateway. We have at least couple AI gateways, libraries like that every week on HN.
  - shevy-java 3mo ago
    Because it is simply incorrect. I have been using ruby since 2005 or so. Static types were never relevant or needed in the slightest here. The various claims by the type afficionados camps could easily be disproven and rejected, but that never stopped them from trying to ruin other languages. > But I don’t think appreciating modern static typing is just evangelism. But it is evangelism, because the type-addicted devs want to slap on types on ruby. That is evangelism. They try to change an existing language to their world view and narrative. And you can not talk to them because their brain is deadlocked here. This is why the person you replied to, is correct here.
    - notpachet 3mo ago
      Languages are always evolving, because the needs they serve are always evolving. Stasis is death. > I have been using ruby since 2005 or so. Static types were never relevant or needed in the slightest here. We are like Liebniz monads, with disjoint views of the same universe due to our different experiences. I worked for several years at Shopify and there were droves of developers begging for types. Shopify itself recognized this need. We contributed early to Sorbet and began implementing it in the main monolith prior to it being publicly announced. I personally was the incident response on-call for a million-dollar bug that static typing would have prevented from ever being merged. And so on.

jimbokun 3mo ago

This is not a tool for using LLMs to write Ruby code.

notpachet 3mo ago
No, it's just a tool someone posted that's written in Ruby, with a strong signal that the authors are LLM proponents. It could have been a todo list and I'd still have the same question.

taylorlapeyre 3mo ago

Well, LLMs have an obscene amount of context built into their weights about Ruby on Rails, and can work within it extremely quickly.

lackoftactics 3mo ago

Even as rails dev, I am seeing that you might be right. It’s really hard to find specific pros nowadays that Ruby brings to the table. All that talk about conventions over configurations and vast presence of Rails in weights is fun, but if writing speed isn’t an issue anymore, then Ruby on Rails has serious problems with larger codebases

cutler 3mo ago
Codebases like Stripe?
- lackoftactics 3mo ago
  they introduced static typing (Sorbet) to avoid problems, it's completely different app and looks nowhere close to what you experience in standard Rails app
  - cutler 3mo ago
    AirBnB.

MitziMoto 3mo ago

You static typed evangelists have lost your damn minds. You seem to have completely misunderstood what this library even is because you have some primal urge to boast static typing at every chance. You can build high quality software with dynamically typed languages, and Ruby is an absolute dream to read and write.

lackoftactics 3mo ago
Why do you think that follows? I was on team dynamic typing for about 12 years, and Ruby was a big part of that. I still think dynamic languages can be wonderful to read and write. But after using modern statically typed languages with good inference, I changed my mind. Many of my old objections were really objections to verbose type systems, not static typing itself. With inference, you can keep a lot of the readability while gaining safer refactoring, better tooling, and earlier feedback. That doesn’t mean dynamic languages can’t produce high-quality software. They obviously can. But I don’t think appreciating modern static typing is just evangelism. And yes, I understand what this library is about, it's for "beautiful" easy to use interface to AI providers for Ruby apps. It's the popular play nowadays with litellm, bifrost, gomodel and vercel gateway. We have at least couple AI gateways, libraries like that every week on HN.
- shevy-java 3mo ago
  Because it is simply incorrect. I have been using ruby since 2005 or so. Static types were never relevant or needed in the slightest here. The various claims by the type afficionados camps could easily be disproven and rejected, but that never stopped them from trying to ruin other languages. > But I don’t think appreciating modern static typing is just evangelism. But it is evangelism, because the type-addicted devs want to slap on types on ruby. That is evangelism. They try to change an existing language to their world view and narrative. And you can not talk to them because their brain is deadlocked here. This is why the person you replied to, is correct here.
  - notpachet 3mo ago
    Languages are always evolving, because the needs they serve are always evolving. Stasis is death. > I have been using ruby since 2005 or so. Static types were never relevant or needed in the slightest here. We are like Liebniz monads, with disjoint views of the same universe due to our different experiences. I worked for several years at Shopify and there were droves of developers begging for types. Shopify itself recognized this need. We contributed early to Sorbet and began implementing it in the main monolith prior to it being publicly announced. I personally was the incident response on-call for a million-dollar bug that static typing would have prevented from ever being merged. And so on.