←back to thread

RBS, Ruby’s new type signature language

(developer.squareup.com)
511 points mootrichard | 4 comments | 29 Jul 20 18:04 UTC | HN request time: 0.556s | source
Show context
recursivedoubts ◴[29 Jul 20 18:49 UTC] No.23990262[source]▶
Cool. And glad to see this called out:

Better IDE integration: Parsing RBS files gives IDEs better understanding of the Ruby code. Method name completions run faster. On-the-fly error reporting detects more problems. Refactoring can be more reliable!

IDE support (autocomplete, refactoring and quick documentation) is the most important reason to annotate argument and return types.

replies(1): >>23990372 #
bytematic ◴[29 Jul 20 18:59 UTC] No.23990372[source]▶
I've been using typescript for a few years now and to be honest I almost never rely on the compilation errors. I just use the built in Jetbrains IDE completion, autosuggestion, and navigation to make it work.
replies(1): >>23990480 #
recursivedoubts ◴[29 Jul 20 19:11 UTC] No.23990480[source]▶
Yep. A good IDE to a first approximation doesn't allow compilation errors to occur because you are auto-completing everything, including symbol completion based on the type at cursor, etc.

Jetbrains is a wonderful company.

replies(1): >>23990995 #
1. smabie ◴[29 Jul 20 20:07 UTC] No.23990995[source]▶
Since the advent of LSP, I think the value proposition of a full featured IDE has been greatly diminished.

For example, I used to use Intellij for Scala but recently switched to Emacs+Metals and haven't really missed anything. In fact, it's probably an even better editing experience.

Intellij still has better refactoring (though I don't use it much), and the integrated debugger and database viewer are really nice. I've found myself using Emacs and only switching to Intellij for the aforementioned specialized tasks.

5 years ago you would have been crazy not using an IDE for JVM work but this is no longer the case. LSP is such a wonderful technology and has empowered the creation of new programming languages like never before. It's truly remarkable.

If I was Intellij, I would be a little worried about my future market share. They simply can't provide the same value as before, and I'm not sure how they intend to change that.

replies(3): >>23991611 #>>23996107 #>>24004650 #
2. jolux ◴[29 Jul 20 21:08 UTC] No.23991611[source]▶
I wish I had had your luck with language servers. They are fantastic when they work but in my experience configuring them is finicky and difficult, particularly with Emacs. I have also run into problems where the server crashes and does not restart itself, so the IDE functionality in my editor will just silently break and I have to go fix it. JetBrains still dominates the market for IDEs that work out of the box, and I still don't know of any LSPs that can even remotely compete with the sophistication of their static analysis tools and such.
3. noisy_boy ◴[30 Jul 20 09:15 UTC] No.23996107[source]▶
IntelliJ's own checking has had its issues (e.g. this bug https://github.com/intellij-rust/intellij-rust/issues/5807).

However, my experience with rls/rust-analyzer with VSCode hasn't been great either. Red squiggly lines that persist even if the syntax is correct - I have to erase and type the same thing to trigger refreshed checking which is very annoying and counter-productive. Though it is possible that this is more of an integration issue considering I haven't had similar problems with Typescript on VSCode - the checking was flawless (I think typescript checking also uses a language server).

4. yawaramin ◴[31 Jul 20 01:16 UTC] No.24004650[source]▶
Does Metals have a feature to add parameter names at method callsites? I use that IntelliJ feature of the Scala plugin all the time, it's such a lifesaver.