dd-trace-rb VS irb

Thing is, once you have 1) and 2), the added complexity of bringing in, integrating, and writing for a different tool to achieve 3) begins to make little sense, when you can just go along and do it just as well in rspec anyway... It's a matter of balance and heavily depends on the project.

> if you're still at Datadog

As a matter of fact I am. Feel free to shoot me an email.

    curl -s https://github.com/DataDog/dd-trace-rb/commit/176c642ca73679cabc5fa1a113bc9b600aa04dcd.patch | grep '^From:'

> For myself, I'm fine with the typing being in a separate .rbs file

We type[0] by having one separate .rbs file per .rb file. Works really well with an editor's vertical splits: type outline on one side, code on the other. That, or use something like vim-projectionist[1].

[0]: (WIP: there's a huge codebase to type, but we're progressively getting there) https://github.com/DataDog/dd-trace-rb/tree/master/sig

[1]: https://github.com/tpope/vim-projectionist

Thanks! I'll pass it on to the team :D

I've got to say, the folks at Intercom made it particularly fun. They were sending us traces and graphs from their internal systems when we trying to figure out some issues with them (e.g. we ran into this datadog context problem: https://github.com/DataDog/dd-trace-rb/issues/1389)

I think one of the most interesting things to happen to IRB is the recent introduction of static type completion[1].

The fact that this is a nice, mainstream, usage of RBS types in the standard library gives me hope that RBS or some kind of inline[2] version of it will become much more common in future.

1. https://github.com/ruby/irb?tab=readme-ov-file#type-based-co...

2. The new Prism parser makes it much easier to extract an execute comments so I would be surprised if no one has thought of using that to annotate code with RBS types.

> debugger

Check out the latest IRB on 3.3, it finally gives Pry a run for its money!

https://github.com/ruby/irb#debugging-with-irb

    $ ruby test.rb

Ruby's IRB has always been nice to work with: https://github.com/ruby/irb#commands

Of course LISP is the example to look at with REPL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Read%E2%80%93eval%E2%80%93prin...

...esp with Emacs: https://slime.common-lisp.dev/

Starting in ruby 2.6, irb is a gem bundled with ruby, so you can upgrade to the latest version in older rubies: https://github.com/ruby/irb#installation

irb is now a bundled gem, so you can update it without having to update the whole ruby or install RVM. gem update irb

I guess it's just not very well refined yes. Best might be to lock it to gem "irb", "< 1.4" in your Gemfile for the time being, and maybe report your feedback to https://github.com/ruby/irb

Yet it does not work exactly the way you might expect in IRB, because it’s explicitly configured to return the last used value in the Ruby console

Oh... neato! https://github.com/ruby/irb/blob/29cd767c2a8bf3cdd13a3b21fda1d997bb8974e0/lib/irb/completion.rb#L270