Ruby produced some of the best light-config or code-as-config software I've ever seen, and thankfully forced many aspects of Java's XML-SOAP-boilerplate problems to be finally addressed and thrown out.

But Groovy has static types and a legit JIT on the JVM with @CompileStatic. I agree very weakly with a lot of the contentions in the article because they are also major language advantages Groovy has (or had) over straight Java, but it is deck chair rearranging.

Ruby has had problems with performance and the usual problems with type-light scripting in large codebases. I don't know how good Ruby IDEs are, but fundamentally it has to be challenging to know what type and methods can be called on something being returned from a ruby expression, although it is amazing what Javascript IDEs can do with type inferencing so what do I know.

Groovy is a dead language though, killed by Kotlin, and Ruby is getting destroyed by Python.

This sort of "language/tool/framework is a dumpster fire" post is not helpful or curious. Every tool has its flaws and places where it excels. Painting with broad strokes ignores nuance and implies a lack of familiarity with why the tool gets used.

Besides, PHP exists (/s)

As a language it is completely unsuitable for large projects, the dynamic features that are helpful at a small scale become liabilities at a large scale.

Ruby’s main flaw is the excessive exuberance of its fans, you wouldn’t develop a large website in bash, you probably shouldn’t do it in Ruby either, but each of the languages still has its own charm and is useful for the things it was designed for.