asgiref VS sorbet

uvicorn is an ASGI server that is recommended for running FastAPI applications.

I can't seem to be able to edit on mobile. OP either meant this, or its variation, such as async_to_sync and sync_to_async.

https://github.com/django/asgiref/blob/main/asgiref/sync.py

Ofc this is a python example. I have no idea how it works in different languages.

FastAPI is a popular Python Web framework that developers use to create RESTful APIs. It is based on Pydantic and Python-type hints that assist in the serialization, deserialization, and validation of data. In this tutorial, we will use FastAPI to create a simple "Hello World" application. We test and run the application locally. FastAPI requires a ASGI server to run the application production such as Uvicorn.

Look at the intended semantics [1], and then read the implementation [2]. Can you figure out if the implementation is correct? Can you infer the possible limitations of the approach at glance? Can your async library actually handle being called with multiple event loops installed?

I have zero trust in this code and I have been bitten by fixes to this library that introduced deadlocks in my own code.

[1] https://github.com/django/asgiref#synchronous-code--threads.

[2] https://github.com/django/asgiref/blob/main/asgiref/sync.py#...

Using WebSockets in Django utilizes asynchronous Python and Django channels, making the process straightforward. Using Django channels, you can create an ASGI server, and then create a group where users can send text messages to all the other users in the group in real time. This way, you are not communicating with a particular user, but with a group, multiple users can be added.

If you're interested in the architecture itself I recommend you start by making yourself familiar with [ASGI specification](https://asgi.readthedocs.io/en/latest/) .

We switched to using strong typing derived from the asgiref for typing ASGI types, which makes Starlite the strongest type framework of its kind.

First let's introduce the tool: Sorbet is a gem developed by Stripe that aims to bring type notation syntax and type checking support for the Ruby ecosystem by utilizing the "Gradual typing" philosophy, it also provide type generation from YARD comments via the tapioca gem, allowing to grow alongside the already built Ruby codebase.

We have hundreds of thousands of lines of ruby code spanning many services / monoliths. Even now I find it somewhat annoying to open a controller / component that is basically an empty class def but somehow executes a bunch of complex stuff via mixins, monkey patches etc, and you have to figure out how.

We are turning to https://sorbet.org/ to reign in the madness. I'm keen to know if others are doing the same, and how they are finding it (pros and cons)

According to https://sorbet.org/ , the vast majority of code at Stripe is written in ruby.

> I guess what I'm asking is: do you see a future where there is more explicit control afforded to people who want to pick their own tradeoffs without resorting to writing everything performance-sensitive in extensions written in C/Rust/whatever?

An approach exists already in the present, and it's Stripe's Sorbet AOT compiler (https://github.com/sorbet/sorbet/tree/master/compiler).

That's incorrect. You may be thinking of Stripe, and AFAICT it's not very actively developed anymore: https://github.com/sorbet/sorbet/commits/master/compiler

Sorbet can do this, as long as you have type signatures for your code. Given Ruby's highly dynamic nature that's where tools like Tapioca come in to generate these, for example for Active Record models where instance methods are generated based on the database schema. But the moment when something returns T.untyped you're back where you were before - it helps but isn't perfect.