[joelbluminator]

I think most rubyists do benefit from dynamic types. How easy would it be to build rspec and Rails in java? The whole dependency injection thing in Spring is in part a by product of types making it way harder to test things. That's just one example.

[nevertoolate]

Can you give a concrete code example you are talking about? What is your problem with DI with spring? Why do you feel it is a problem with static type checker?

[jashmatthews]

DI for testability adds complexity to code and reduces readability. In Ruby it's almost always unncessessary to use DI because in Ruby you can stub at runtime.

In other statically typed langues like Rust the type system itself eliminates the need for a lot of these tests but at the cost of mental overhead of expressing your logic in a way which will satisy the type system.

[joelbluminator]

What jashmatthews said mostly. It adds bloat and isn't very readable. It's another "ceremony" that together with types, interfaces, generics etc increases lines of code. I can see the benefits for huge projects, but I don't like this way by default out of the box.