I agree with your analysis that RBS and Sorbet suck.

I disagree that this here should be part of ruby-core, largely because I don't think any of this type madness should infiltrate ruby.

Ruby does not necessarily follow "DRY" - that appears to have been coined by either DHH or the pickaxe guys. More than one way to do it, is kind of orthogonal to DRY too. Note: I do not disagree that DRY has value. What I am saying is that ruby's design does not necessarily follow DRY as a guiding principle.

> hard to believe we are in 2025 and we still don't have a decent, programmer-friendly solution in ruby-core.

I do not think the year has anything to do with it. If they suck - and types suck - then they should not be in ruby core. I understand you have another opinion, but that's the beauty - we have orthogonal opinions there. One says must be part of ruby core; the other says should not be part of ruby-core ever, no matter the year.

> Meanwhile Python has it right since a long time.

The question is: how many use it there?

> No wonder it is so stagnated with people going for other stacks.

Lack of types aren't the reason ruby declined. That is a wrong assumption here.

> Ruby is slowly becoming what Perl did, a very niche language.

That is true, but not due to lack of types. Python without types would still be at rank #1 at TIOBE for instance. Your analysis is simply wrong here.