> Wish we'd see more action on RBS

This is always my biggest complaint about Ruby. Last time I made a fuss about this on HN someone pointed out rbs-inline which might make it into the core rbhs gem itself soon! This would be huge for the Ruby community imo

https://github.com/soutaro/rbs-inline

From where I stand, Ruby has much more interesting work going on JIT land than Python.

Much of the Python stuff, is actually about rewriting Python tools into Rust due to its interpreter slowness and no one caring about PyPy, now apparently there is even a PEP to rewrite CPython!

https://discuss.python.org/t/pre-pep-rust-for-cpython/104906

I was so disappointed in how RBS was executed it caused me to give up on Ruby and move onto something else. I haven't looked back.

You should look into rbs-inline. It's a huge DX improvement. The community spoke up and they are moving in the right direction now.

I'm still a Ruby fan but I share your immense, nearly immeasurable disappointment on the implementation of RBS. It's as though someone was tasked to add types to Ruby but do it specifically in a way that would guarantee zero adoption.

Out of curiosity, why was RBS so poorly executed and adopted?

They put them in separate designated .rbs files, so far out of the way that they might as well not be there at all.