spinel

Truffle is very good. Could also use Matz's Spinel Ruby compiler. That's Ruby with static types using RBS but you have to give up some metaprogramming to get it. I love the idea that we could get ractors written with Spinel and compiled ahead of time. I also love the idea that I can use Ruby for self contained binary tools. (And for the sake of avoiding confusion, Crystal is also a great project. I'm really pleased to see them continue making progress). https://github.com/matz/spinel

The project is at https://github.com/matz/spinel , discussed at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47887334 34 days ago | 90 comments.

I'm recently seeing more and more Ruby projects that are at least partly vibe-coded, and I'm kind of torn. On the one hand I appreciate that this allows people to create stuff that they maybe wouldn't have the time to do otherwise. On the other, the code itself makes it harder for people to contribute, especially those, like me, who don't use coding agents. A random example: https://github.com/amatsuda/rubish/blob/master/lib/rubish/pa... Where are the interface boundaries? Why are there methods that are 200 lines long? This is not a dis at the author, and it's not really about "code quality" per se, whatever that means. It's just that if someone would like to study the code and be able to improve it or add features, how would one go about it? Does this mean you have to use a coding agent in order to contribute? I felt the same about the r

I'm skeptical of that reasoning because the original C wasn't too clean or performant either. For example emit.c from an earlier commit [1] It writes a separate call to emit_raw for each line, even though there many successive calls to emit_raw before it runs into any branching or other dynamic logic. What if you change this emit_raw(ctx, "#include <stdio.h>\n"); emit_raw(ctx, "#include <stdlib.h>\n"); emit_raw(ctx, "#include <string.h>\n"); emit_raw(ctx, "#include <math.h>\n"); // And on for dozens more lines to this emit_raw(ctx, "#include <stdio.h>\n" "#include <stdlib.h>\n" "#include <string.h>\n" "#include <math.h>\n" // And on for dozens more lines ); That would leave you with code that is just as readable, but only calls the emit function once, leading to a small

spinel_codegen.rb is an eldritch horror. I always get spaghetti code like this when using Claude, and I've been wondering if I'm doing something wrong. Now I see an application that looks genuinely interesting (not trivial slop) written by someone I consider to be a top notch programmer, and the code quality is still pretty garbage in some places. For example infer_comparison_type() [1]. This is far from the worst offender - it's not that hard to read - but what's striking here that there is a better implementation that's so simple and obvious and Claude still fails to get there. Why not replace this with COMPARISON_TYPES = Set.new(["<", ">", "<=", ">=", "==", "!=", "!"]) def infer_comparison_type(mname) if COMPARISON_TYPES.include?(mname) "bool" else "" end # Or even better, strip the e