←back to thread

RBS, Ruby’s new type signature language

(developer.squareup.com)
511 points mootrichard | 1 comments | 29 Jul 20 18:04 UTC | HN request time: 0.242s | source
Show context
freedomben ◴[29 Jul 20 19:31 UTC] No.23990680[source]▶
I'm not thrilled about the separate files with the type information but I completely understand why they did it, and if it were my choice I might make the same one.

I don't like the comparison with TypeScript `.d.ts` files however, because TS still lets you do types inline in the code. I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere that this won't be supported by Ruby 3.

Does anybody know if Ruby 3 will also support inline type information or will the header RBS files be required?

replies(3): >>23990915 #>>23991508 #>>23992127 #
amw-zero ◴[29 Jul 20 19:59 UTC] No.23990915[source]▶
I much prefer separate files for type declarations. Or at least the ability to define them separately. Type annotation takes away from readability. I like keeping the types and code separate.
replies(4): >>23990990 #>>23991109 #>>23991234 #>>23991625 #
1. benrbray ◴[29 Jul 20 20:30 UTC] No.23991234[source]▶
> Type annotation takes away from readability.

Do you mean for Ruby specifically or in general? I've found that it's much easier to (safely, accurately) read, use, and extend e.g. a TypeScript file than its JavaScript counterpart, even when provided with a .d.ts file.