What was cool was Rails, IMHO, and Ruby was the surprise inside it.
I've had my own personal Advent of Code these holidays, coding a small API for a personal need. Ruby (Sinatra) took one morning to full deployment in Heroku. Then I tried Crystal (Kemal) and it took me a couple of days to figure out how to map JSON to Crystal data structures. Then I rewrote it again in Rust (Rocket). Two weeks till I figured out, well, almost everything.
My opinion: they will take dynamic typing from my dead cold hands.
I also took a while to get used to the typing in Crystal but once you do get it, it's worth the effort IMO. I occasionally still fire up Ruby but if I have anything more to do than a quick command-line command, I use Crystal, so many less problems.
Crystal was overall a pleasant experience, which I cannot say for Rust. Although it was probably my fault: 1) for being "rusty" as a programmer myself, and 2) having zero experience with Rust. I want to believe that once you get over the learning curve in Rust development speed becomes much higher.
Surprisingly, Crystal seems to be much leaner in runtime size than Rust, with similar performance (although the use case is so simple that even good old Ruby is fast enough).
But then again, I feel you cannot beat Ruby in terms of dev productivity.
I've heard it described that Rust allows you to write programs in a specific way. If you try to write them in any other way, you're going to have a very, very bad time, and fight the borrow checker every step of the way. But if you embrace that way of writing programs, it makes it pretty easy, you get really good error messages, and as a cherry on top your program will be provably sound in a way pretty much no other language can guarantee. So it all comes down to whether you're interested in learning that specific way of structuring programs.
That's true, but then it is not "allowing" or "enabling" me, it is "forcing" me to do it that way. Of course, the Rust compiler is catching a gazillion bugs beforehand, so this is cool: you finally feel like your program will have no bugs once you manage to compile it.
Error management through Option values, the borrowing checker... they are cool technologies for a C-like language, but they are not palatable at the beginning (maybe they are an acquired taste like beer?). I am tempted to stretch it a little bit more and see how productive I can become writing Rust code, but also not so sure about the effort.
I also gave Rust a go (last year? Hard to keep track since the pandemic) but the book I was using was geared to C programmers so I quickly lost interest, though I would like to understand what the hype is about.
I think the bit about productivity may certainly be true if you have to use libraries, obviously Ruby has many more available now (maybe forever), but I certainly feel more productive in Crystal now, maybe for things other than the language itself, admittedly. For example, producing a binary makes installation a breeze, and I don't worry about which version I'm running as I point the right compiler at the code; no Bundler now, library installs are sane (at last!); and socially I find the lack of "rockstars" in the main team refreshing, I have no fear of being dissed or dismissed, it makes contributing easier.
I think I'd be more interested in Crystal if it was easier to integrate into existing ruby code bases via something like the FFI.
As it is from Ruby 3.0 we have built in optional static typing and with interesting projects like Sorbet Compiler[1] we have the option to statically compile making use of that. It's still WIP I believe but it's giving ruby devs some cool options.
> I think I'd be more interested in Crystal if it was easier to integrate into existing ruby code bases via something like the FFI.
That would be very nice, I agree, though I've always found the FFI interface an under-documented pain so I'd probably end up just using Crystal or using some other way to interoperate, like pipes or HTTP.
On Sorbet, I just hate the look of it. I know it's subjective (possibly that's Ruby's own fault for being so delightful to look at, I'm spoiled!) but I can't abide the syntax. Crystal's is much nicer, and has some extra sugar sprinkled on top for the moments you're most likely to be using it (like external names in method signatures[1] or providing init args) that win out for me.
Sorry about the formatting, I can't work out HN's markdown :/
# Ruby
# from the Sorbet intro
extend T::Sig
sig {params(name: String).returns(Integer)}
def main(name)
puts "Hello, #{name}!"
name.length
end
# Crystal
def main(name : String) : Int
puts "Hello, #{name}!"
name.size
end
puts main "you"
That's so much nicer to my eyes, and you don't need most of it as it will be inferred.
Initialisation is nicer, too, (unless Ruby has been updated in this regard too? As I wrote, I use it much less now)
# Crystal
class A
getter name : String
def initialize(*, @name); end
end
a = A.new name: "Hacker News"
puts a.name
or without the getter and keyword arg:
# Crystal
class A
getter name
def initialize(@name : String); end
end
a = A.new "Hacker News"
puts a.name
Whatever suits.
# Crystal
# Example of external names
def increment(value, by)
# OK, but reads odd
value + by
end
def increment(value : Int, by amount : Int) : Int
# Better
value + amount
end
puts increment 1, 2
but those types are easily inferred so it's actually:
# Crystal
def increment(value, by amount)
# Even better
value + amount
end
I could go on because now I'm comfortable with it, it looks much better. I feel the way moving from Perl and C# to Ruby felt.
So you are accusing me of lying, how lovely of you!
Let's see if your accusations can hold up to Socratic questioning:
- If I haven't open sourced any Crystal projects does that mean I haven't written any?
- I have published several Ruby gems[0], when was the last commit or version bump for any of them? You're more interested that I am, tell me. I really should archive them, thanks for reminding me.
- You missed off my Gitlab, what was the last public contribution I made there? (hint[1])
- What's the last gem I created? I reckon it's this one that I didn't publish[2] because the Rack team changed a public API in such a dumb way that I'd have to rewrite it and then mucked me around with a pull request to Rack that one of the core team copy and pasted in as their own commit while arguing against the pull. Weird, but lovely people, like yourself. Meanwhile, your cookies lack security. Yes, I want to continue working within this language and ecosystem… Does the sarcasm come through in my writing?
- Why did you not check the Crystal repo?[3][4] Github has a search facility. Put my username in, and pick `commits` on the left.
- How did you miss the forks of Docopt.cr[5] and Fancyline[6]? They're right there in my public activity log. Did you not see the merges into Fancyline of my code?[7] I have more to give, just trying to find the time.
- Did you not see forks with commits such as xattr.cr[8], xdg.cr[9], and Pope.cr[10]
- You didn't see I'd provided a project[11] for Mint so it can be run easier with Docker Compose?
- Aside from that I have a whole host of changes to migrate.cr[12] still to push up. You can't know that but you might've guessed that I was at least working with that - and all the other forks of Crystal projects I have.
That is all public and not the half of the Crystal code I look at.
Should I expect an apology? If you were too cowardly to be straightforward with your accusations then I find it stretches credulity far beyond breaking that you could be big enough to provide one. We'll see, like you, I've been very wrong about people in the past.
Sorry, looking through the forks, they are all in sync with master, and most your contributions are small. It is great, nothing against it. The only thing that I wanted to say is that as soon as you start to work in a real project with Crystal you realize that it is not just a better ruby and it comes with it's own set of problems, patterns and etc. So I don't see a point to cite Crystal as option to ruby in every thread about ruby. That's my point.
> Sorry, looking through the forks, they are all in sync with master
I don't think you understand how Git works, which probably explains why you missed all the repos I needed to point out to you.
> , and most your contributions are small
What have you ever contributed? Show me.
> The only thing that I wanted to say is that as soon as you start to work in a real project with Crystal you realize that it is not just a better ruby and it comes with it's own set of problems, patterns and etc.
How would you know? Please share the repo in which you found this out. What is a "real" project?
> So I don't see a point to cite Crystal as option to ruby in every thread about ruby.
You've contributed nothing of worth, not even a specific criticism of Crystal, let alone anything worth knowing about Ruby.
> I don't think you understand how Git works, which probably explains why you missed all the repos I needed to point out to you.
LOL, you forked many repositories and didn't push any code. You just proved my point. Just people without experience in Crystal comes to ruby related threads to say "Dude, use Crystal". Happy learning <3
> LOL, you forked many repositories and didn't push any code.
Well, firstly that isn't true, and secondly even if it were true it's a good idea to fork repos you use. So, not only are you:
- childish ("LOL", really? This is HN)
- lying (always the sign of a strong argument)
- unable to search Github effectively
You also show bad development practices. Did you not see what happened this week with Colors.js[1]?
> You just proved my point.
Quite the opposite.
> Just people without experience in Crystal comes to ruby related threads to say "Dude, use Crystal".
Where is your repo showing your experience in Crystal? Or Ruby for that matter. Money where mouth is time, do you even have a single commit to a project in either language?
> You've contributed nothing of worth, not even a specific criticism of Crystal, let alone anything worth knowing about Ruby.
There is nothing in the text about Crystal. Why should I talk about Crystal?
> Where is your repo showing your experience in Crystal? Or Ruby for that matter.
I don't have too. That's not about Crystal, but about ruby :)
That's not about me and my code, not either about your little unknown rubygems, but the desire from people like to you to recommend Crystal as "drop-in" replacement for ruby, which is not.. Typical "I'm vegan" comment when people are talking about barbecue.
If you know nothing about Crystal, and seem unable to provide any evidence that you have anything of note to add about Ruby, then you have no way of knowing if Crystal can be a drop-in replacement for Ruby, and why you’re using quotes around “drop-in” when you’re the only person on the entire page to have used that word is telling.
Mendacious to the last. If you find a way to make a substantive or informed observation then do let me know, otherwise, please save it for your friends on Reddit.
> they would see how far from "better ruby" is Crystal
Are you accusing us both of lying? How strange.
now that I read "accusing us both of lying".. how could you interpret it like that? What I can see by your code, you are ruby developer trying to learn Crystal. See you in the next ruby thread ;)
I've had so many problems in the past, even on my own machine, writing quick scripts for Ruby that then fail because of clashing versions etc. Being able to produce a binary is nice, or even just using `crystal run`.
Btw, I took a look around your Github and found some really interesting projects (yours and others), thanks for replying!
Hot take: I'd love to see JSON die and get replaced with something more strongly typed and safer to work with. What, I'm not sure, but it is, as you say, a major pain point no matter what language you're in. Either it's easy to work with, but insecure, or it's difficult to work with.
Apparently Rails is the killer application for Ruby just like Unix/Linux is a killer application for C. What Ruby enabled is something that was not feasible to be done by Java, PHP, Perl and Python (top four most popular languages for web at the beginning of Rails). For better perspective on the matter please check an excellent article by Patrick Lee, the author of the new Stanza language.
Sorry I had to intervene here. I had the same sentiment about IDE support for Elixir from using the mediocre IntelliJ Plugin.
However... after dabbling a bit I discovered VS Code + Remote Containers Plugin (because of Docker) + ElixirLS + other minor Elixir plugins that have turned my Elixir development experience into pure bliss. I haven't used the debugger in the IDE yet but I am 99% sure it's gonna work out of the box.
Happy to try and share the setup if you want to try it out.
You probably don't want to use an ide-driven debugger for elixir, you'll want to use :dbg which has a different "conceptual model" than what you are used to and doesn't map well onto Conventional debuggers.
It's simply not the same due to the extreme high degree of concurrency in the beam VM
Literally, elixir doesn't work like that. There is a bunch of other stuff running around in the VM, even if you don't ask for it. It's like an operating system.
> is why people some people find the Elixir community off-putting
I mean ok. Note that I said "you probably". I'm just coming from a lot more experience than you have. But sure, keep giving yourself excuses to be closed minded. It really sounds like you went into the whole thing with the "let me find a reason to hate elixir" mindset, and not the "let me see what people are raving about mindset". Anyways, you're the one missing out.
> Literally, elixir doesn't work like that. There is a bunch of other stuff running around in the VM, even if you don't ask for it. It's like an operating system.
And yet, it does. Here's proof that you're wrong, a screenshot of the community Elixir plugin paused on a breakpoint, all the variables inspectable/modifiable and you can even jump around the stack: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/KronicDeth/intellij-elixir...
The problem was that I could not get the plugin to work consistently, but when it did work it was great.
> I'm just coming from a lot more experience than you have... giving yourself excuses to be closed minded....Anyways, you're the one missing out.
it's way different now. I've actually never deployed elixir on a deployment service till last week (either: "was R&D and never deployed to prod", "I ran elixir on-prem inside a DC", "my prod environments have been managed by ops team"). It was surprisingly easy, had my first deploy (including installing the service provider's tool) in about... 3 hours?
I've had my own personal Advent of Code these holidays, coding a small API for a personal need. Ruby (Sinatra) took one morning to full deployment in Heroku. Then I tried Crystal (Kemal) and it took me a couple of days to figure out how to map JSON to Crystal data structures. Then I rewrote it again in Rust (Rocket). Two weeks till I figured out, well, almost everything.
My opinion: they will take dynamic typing from my dead cold hands.