Issue #9999 has been updated by burlesona (Andrew Burleson). RDL is interesting, I wonder what the runtime overhead is like? Another source of inspiration could be Facebook's Flow ([[https://flow.org/en/docs/getting-started/]]) for JS. In that case it's build-time type checking, mostly inferred, with optional annotations. While it would be nice to avoid mandatory annotations, and I see Matz saying they won't exist at all, being able to add optional annotations would be nice. /shrug ---------------------------------------- Feature #9999: Type Annotations (Static Type Checking) https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/9999#change-64049 * Author: DAddYE (Davide D'Agostino) * Status: Feedback * Priority: Normal * Assignee: * Target version: ---------------------------------------- Hi all, I know @matz is interested in introducing **type annotations** in ruby. More here: https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/5583 I think it's time for ruby to get this. Before working on a patch I would like to know: 1. Syntax of methods signatures 2. Syntax of variables guards (?) 3. Implementation For point **1** I was thinking in some like: ~~~ruby def connect(r -> Stream, c -> Client) -> Fiber def connect(Stream r, Client c) -> Fiber # quite sure this will make some reduce problems in the grammar ~~~ Before making a proposal consider: keyword arguments and default value collisions. Then for point **2** I'm not sure if we want also check assignments but as before a syntax could be: ~~~ruby r: Client = something # will throw an exception if something is not kind of Client ~~~ Finally, **implementation**. Do we want some in python style and then leave the programmer/library for the implementation **or** (and I'm for this) we want MRI do that, if so how? Cheers! DD p.s. Sorry if this issue was already discussed but I didn't find anything except the link posted. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/ Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request / ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe> <http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>