Comment by sroerick
11 hours ago
I'm sad you're getting downvoted. This is objectively uglier Ruby code. Ruby is a gorgeous language, and aesthetics is seemingly not allowed in the conversation.
I'm not convinced that the time savings of types exist at all, but even if it took twice as long to do anything with types, there is a completely valid argument that "it's worth it to look at nicer code".
I want to agree, but in this current form, gp comes off as an emotional gatekeeper rather than someone with valid points. I think there are strong arguments for both sides. One off scripts with types is bs. Glue code with types, almost bs. Code close to the wire, typing those can be a pain with no gains. But business logic? Large code bases? You can pry* types from my cold dead hands.