From: Eivind Eklund <eeklund@...>
Date: 2005-10-03T23:40:47+09:00
Subject: Re: Large Ruby Apps ?

On 10/3/05, Lothar Scholz <mailinglists@scriptolutions.com> wrote:
> Hello Matt,
>
> MP> A much more recent example of this sort of type inference inference,
> MP> for a subset of Python, is Shed Skin:
>
> MP> The guy seems to know what he's talking about, maybe some of these
> MP> ideas could be transferrable to an experimental, type inferring Ruby?
>
> I'm still convinced that type inference with ruby and python without
> added declarations is complete useless, so i was very surprised by
> this stuff, but after reading the following:
>
> <QUOTE>
> At the moment the compiler correctly handles 124 unit tests,
> six of which are serious programs of between 100 and 200 lines:
> </QUOTE>
>
> I now feel again on a save ground with my opinion. The guy had managed to
> transform a program of 200 lines of code to C++, very cool. But this
> does not say very much about real world usage.

Have you read the references on type inference for Self *which has
been real world implemented and has worked*?

This is a prototype based object oriented language with, as far as I
can tell, the same set of challenges as Ruby.  Smalltalk has many of
the same challenges; Self has full set of challenges as pure Ruby.  (C
extensions is a separate issue, of course.)  That implementation has
been tested against the use of type feedback, getting similar end
results.

Do you have any concrete challenges in Ruby that you think are beyond
the challenges in Self?  As far as I've been able to tell, the Self
implementation contains all the challenges that a Ruby implementaiton
would.

If you don't, please stop scaring people - we want them to go
implement type inference for Ruby :)

Eivind.