Is that really something that's been slated to be added to the language proper? I attended RubyConf and in his keynote Matz seemed pretty opposed to adding types to Ruby source, and argued in favor of automatic typing instead.

You can always use Crystal or Dart if you want builtin types. I like Ruby the way it is an trust Matz with his language design decisions.

Crystal is the closest alternative to Ruby with types we have, even though they are semantically different and differ in some places. I do not see why you mentioned Dart as an alternative thought, it’s a totally different language.

> Dart as an alternative thought, it’s a totally different language

Yes it's not Ruby but it has good design, optional type annotations.

Yeah I actually did not necessarily mean to dispute Matz's perspective there. I actually think it will benefit programming as a whole if at least one widely used language takes the path of trying to eschew explicit type annotations.

Ooh, I hadn't heard of rbs-inline before. I was always a bit put off by the type definitions having to live in separate files.