跳到主内容
@wquguru
精选88Hacker News Best(web_list)行业动态

DHH宣布退出编程转做Maker,Rails旗舰应用转向Rust与LLM

What About Rails?

原文
发到 X
推荐理由

DHH作为Rails灵魂人物突然宣布战略转向,用Rust+LLM替代原生开发,这对整个Web开发社区和AI工程实践都是重大信号,值得深入评估其可行性与影响。

Ruby/Rails

What About Rails?

Rails 怎么了?

By Jared Norman

作者:Jared Norman

published September 24th, 2026

发布于 2026 年 9 月 24 日

David Heinemeier Hansson is, for better or worse, still in charge of Ruby on Rails. I’d love to stop paying attention to him, but I build applications with Rails, so his actions affect me and my clients. Yesterday, he gave the opening keynote at Rails World 2026, where he laid out his vision for the future of Rails.

David Heinemeier Hansson 是好是坏,依然掌控着 Ruby on Rails。我很想不再关注他,但我使用 Rails 构建应用程序,因此他的举动会影响我和我的客户。昨天,他在 Rails World 2026 上发表了开幕主题演讲,阐述了他对 Rails 未来的愿景。

Or that’s what his talk should have done. His keynote had very little to do with Rails. Here’s what he did talk about, and what it means for Rails.

或者说,那本应该是他的演讲内容。但他的主题演讲与 Rails 几乎没有关系。以下是他实际谈论的内容,以及这对 Rails 意味着什么。

The Gist of It

核心要点

I have retired from being a professional programmer.

我已经退休,不再是一名职业程序员。

Yes, he said that. No, that doesn’t mean he’s stepping away from software development. He now styles himself a “maker.” He now claims that English is the best programming language (because LLMs) and that we don’t even necessarily need to read the code the LLMs produce.

是的,他确实这么说了。不,这并不意味着他将退出软件开发领域。他现在自称为“制造者”(maker)。他声称英语是最好的编程语言(因为大语言模型),甚至我们不一定需要阅读大语言模型生成的代码。

Writing code by hand is no longer an economically productive enterprise for the vast majority of programmers working at the vast majority of companies.

对于绝大多数公司的绝大多数程序员来说,手工编写代码已不再是一项具有经济生产力的工作。

He’s all-in on LLM code generation, so he’s changed his stance on both native applications and the Rust programming language. In his eyes, products like Hey were never really meant to be web apps.

他全力押注于大语言模型代码生成,因此他改变了关于原生应用程序和 Rust 编程语言的立场。在他看来,Hey 等产品从来就不是真正的 Web 应用。

He’s argued for years that the Rails stack allows small teams to build ambitious products. Now, as 37signals are building the next version of Hey, they are going with a different stack. In his telling, the bottleneck is gone, so they’re using LLMs to build native applications for every platform they support.

多年来他一直主张,Rails 技术栈允许小团队构建雄心勃勃的产品。现在,随着 37signals 正在构建 Hey 的下一个版本,他们采用了不同的技术栈。据他所说,瓶颈已经消失,所以他们正使用大语言模型为每个支持的平台构建原生应用程序。

On the server side, they are going with Rust. DHH maintains that the language is hideous and that humans shouldn’t be subjected to it, but that it’s great for LLMs. Since he’s not reading the code anyway, he can now appreciate the performance and stability of the language.

在服务器端,他们选择了 Rust。DHH 坚持认为这种语言丑陋不堪,人类不应受其折磨,但它非常适合大语言模型。既然他反正也不读代码,他现在可以欣赏这种语言的性能和稳定性。

He claims to have written 150k lines of code in August of this year, having previously averaged about 30k lines per year in the pre-LLM era. (He admits much of it is “verbose” Rust.) While Ruby made up about half his work over the last two decades, it sits at only 3% of what he wrote this year.

他声称今年八月写了 15 万行代码,而在大语言模型时代之前,他平均每年只写约 3 万行。(他承认其中大部分是“冗长”的 Rust 代码。)在过去二十年中,Ruby 占了他大约一半的工作量,但今年他只写了 3% 的 Ruby 代码。

The new strategy is rooted in the idea that humans reading code should be the exception, rather than the norm, “like seeing a bug in Sentry.”

新策略基于这样一个理念:人类阅读代码应是例外,而非常态,“就像在 Sentry 中发现一个 bug 一样”。

That’s today. By the end of the year, it will be virtually all domains, virtually all programmers, virtually all companies. So we best get used to it.

那是今天的情况。到今年年底,它将覆盖几乎所有领域、几乎所有程序员、几乎所有公司。所以我们最好习惯它。

He also wants to see every service offer a CLI so that he (read: “his agents”) can interact with it without using the UI.

他还希望每项服务都提供 CLI,以便他(读作:“他的代理”)能够在不使用 UI 的情况下与之交互。

We can now want everything. We can now get everything.

我们现在可以渴望一切。我们现在可以获得一切。

The tail end of his talk focused on his vision of LLMs enabling everyone to create whatever their hearts desire. He spoke about his work on Omarchy and finished by urging the audience to reject AI skepticism and doomerism:

他演讲的尾声聚焦于他对 LLMs 赋能每个人创造心中所想的愿景。他谈到了自己在 Omarchy 上的工作,并以敦促观众拒绝 AI 怀疑论和末日论作为结束:

The black pill is for fucking losers. Don’t be a loser.

黑药丸是给混蛋用的。别当混蛋。

A Rails-shaped Hole

一个 Rails 形状的洞

DHH used the opening keynote of the world’s premier Rails conference to announce that a flagship Rails app was leaving Rails. The Rails content amounted to it still being a great fit for web applications (like Basecamp) and being great for building with AI.

DHH 利用全球顶级 Rails 会议的开幕主题演讲宣布,一款旗舰级 Rails 应用将离开 Rails。关于 Rails 的内容归结为:它仍然是 Web 应用程序(如 Basecamp)的绝佳选择,并且非常适合与 AI 一起构建。

For twenty years we’ve been sold Rails as the framework for “small teams, ambitious products”. I’ve been on a ton of teams that were able to do a lot with a little because of Rails. You probably have too.

二十年来,我们一直被告知 Rails 是“小团队、雄心勃勃的产品”的框架。我曾参与过许多团队,他们因为 Rails 而能够以少量资源完成大量工作。你可能也是如此。

Hey was and is a web app because making web apps for small teams was how you could be productive. In the old times, that is, 5 minutes ago…

Hey 过去是、现在也是 Web 应用,因为为小团队制作 Web 应用是你保持高效的方式。那是旧时代,也就是五分钟以前……

His vision for Rails has narrowed. Rails wasn’t a preference. It was a workaround. It’s now the platform of choice for “web apps of necessity”. Convention over configuration has been reframed as “token efficiency”. Evil Martians’ agent evals are simply a reassurance; AI is good at Rails, so you don’t need to leave.

他对 Rails 的愿景已经缩小。Rails 不是一种偏好,而是一种变通方案。它现在是“因需而建的 Web 应用”的首选平台。“约定优于配置”被重新定义为“Token 效率”。Evil Martians 的代理评估仅仅是一种安慰;AI 擅长 Rails,所以你不需要离开。

There’s a more charitable framing. Rails is a mature, stable framework. Stability is good for agentic development. But he told us only 3% of his work this year was Ruby. Nothing in this talk attempts to distinguish a mature platform from one whose creator is no longer paying attention.

有一种更善意的解读。Rails 是一个成熟、稳定的框架。稳定性有利于代理式开发。但他告诉我们,他今年只有 3% 的工作是用 Ruby 完成的。这场演讲中没有任何内容试图区分一个成熟平台和一个其创建者已不再关注的平台。

The CLI demands were baffling. 37signals differentiates their products with opinionated UI/UX, not novel features. They are rewriting Hey as six native apps because the web fidelity isn’t good enough. So UI matters enough to justify complete rewrites, but also everyone just wants CLIs? If every product is used by an agent driving a CLI, what’s going to differentiate Basecamp or Fizzy from the cheapest alternative? I think this strategy needs a Rework.

对 CLI 的要求令人费解。37signals 通过有观点的 UI/UX 来区分其产品,而非新颖的功能。他们正在将 Hey 重写为六个原生应用,因为 Web 保真度不够好。因此,UI 的重要性足以证明完全重写的合理性,但与此同时,每个人都只想要 CLI?如果每个产品都由驱动 CLI 的代理使用,Basecamp 或 Fizzy 将与最便宜的替代品有何区别?我认为这个策略需要一次《Rework》式的重构。

I’m left wondering what the vision for Rails really is now, and who’s going to drive it. While Mosscap forked on political grounds, part of their core argument is that Rails is done. It’s stable and needs only maintenance. Hanami has a roadmap and a vision for the future of building web applications with Ruby. While much of the day-to-day work on Rails comes from Shopify and elsewhere, DHH historically drove the vision. Now, is he arguing himself out of a business, or has he already left and not told the room?

我不禁在想,Rails 现在的愿景究竟是什么,又由谁来推动它。虽然 Mosscap 因政治原因进行了分叉,但其核心论点的一部分是 Rails 已经“完工”了。它很稳定,只需要维护即可。Hanami 则有明确的路线图和对未来用 Ruby 构建 Web 应用的愿景。尽管 Rails 的日常大量工作来自 Shopify 及其他地方,但 DHH 历来是推动愿景的核心人物。现在,他是在让自己退出业务,还是他已经离开却未告知众人?

The creator of Rails is taking one of his flagship products off the stack. His Ruby output has dropped to 3%. He believes hand-written code will be history for virtually everyone by December. In the face of this, he offers flattery.

Rails 的创造者正将其旗舰产品之一从技术栈中移除。他的 Ruby 代码产出量已降至 3%。他认为,到十二月为止,手写代码对几乎所有人来说都将成为历史。面对这一情况,他却献上了奉承之词。

Now maybe that’s a little scary. Like maybe we’re gonna get a little competition. Who’s afraid of a little competition? Aren’t you better? Don’t you know more? Of course you do. You’re a fucking Rails programmer. You’re the best of the best. This is goddamn Top Gun I’m looking at here. Embrace that. With gusto.

也许这有点令人害怕。比如,也许我们会面临一点竞争。谁怕那点竞争呢?难道你不够优秀吗?难道你懂得更多吗?当然你知道。你是个该死的 Rails 程序员。你是最顶尖中的顶尖。我看到的简直是《壮志凌云》(Top Gun)级别的场景。拥抱它吧。充满激情地拥抱。

This is reassurance instead of a plan. I bet it worked in the room too; confidence always does. But it’s totally hollow. You could say the same thing to a room of Django or Laravel or fucking Spring Boot developers word for word. The one moment he talked directly to Rails developers, he chose to say nothing about Rails.

这是安慰而非计划。我打赌这在房间里也奏效了;自信总是如此。但这完全空洞无物。你可以一字不差地对一群 Django、Laravel 或该死的 Spring Boot 开发者说同样的话。在他唯一直接面向 Rails 开发者讲话的时刻,他却对 Rails 只字未提。

The Hallucinated Elephant in the Room

房间里被幻觉的大象

On to the AI claims. For context, DHH runs a company that makes simple, user-friendly products. They’re so simple that even before the advent of LLMs they would periodically fully rewrite their apps to create new versions.

接下来谈谈 AI 相关的声明。作为背景信息,DHH 经营着一家制作简单、用户友好产品的公司。它们是如此简单,以至于在大型语言模型(LLM)出现之前,他们就会定期完全重写其应用以创建新版本。

37signals succeeds on product and marketing, not on solving hard technical problems. I’m not hating; lots of people love their apps. I’m just saying that their new Kanban app’s success is going to be driven by product decisions and marketing. Kanban board is not one of the hard problems of computer science.

37signals 的成功源于产品和营销,而非解决艰难的技术问题。我不是在贬低;很多人喜欢他们的应用。我只是说,他们新的 Kanban 应用的成功将由产品决策和营销驱动。看板(Kanban board)并非计算机科学中的难题。

So does his approach (never looking at the output, evaluating the result from the outside) work? These tools have come a long way. They still make all kinds of mistakes, but as long as there’s a human in the loop to verify the results and reprompt, it works fine, at least for small apps and easy problems.

那么他的方法(从不查看输出,仅从外部评估结果)有效吗?这些工具已经取得了长足的进步。它们仍然会犯各种错误,但只要有人类在循环中验证结果并重新提示,它就运作良好,至少对于小型应用和简单问题而言是这样。

It’s hard to take the numbers in this talk seriously, because David keeps undermining them. Throughout he presents topics as settled, despite failing to support them coherently.

很难认真对待这场演讲中的数据,因为 David 一直在削弱它们的可信度。 throughout(贯穿始终),他将诸多话题呈现为既定事实,尽管未能连贯地提供支持。

He admits that lines of code is a poor measure and grants that we can’t compare across languages fairly, then compares 150,000 lines of LLM output in August to his 30k/year average, then immediately concedes that he tolerates Rust code from LLMs that he “would never tolerate from [his] Ruby code”. Lines of hand-written, concise Ruby and LLM-generated Rust slop are not comparable. He seems to know this, but compares them anyway.

他承认代码行数是一个糟糕的衡量标准,并承认我们无法公平地跨语言进行比较,然后将 8 月 LLM 输出的 15 万行代码与他每年平均 3 万行进行对比,紧接着又承认他容忍 LLM 生成的 Rust 代码,而这些代码他“绝不会容忍出现在他的 Ruby 代码中”。手工编写的简洁 Ruby 代码与 LLM 生成的 Rust 垃圾代码是不可比的。他似乎知道这一点,但仍然进行了比较。

In the past 20 months, I have written half as much code as I did in the previous 21 years.

在过去的 20 个月里,我写的代码量只有之前 21 年的一半。

Apples to oranges again, and he’s struggling with the definition of “to write”. He didn’t even read the Rust his LLM generated.

这又是拿苹果和橘子做比较,而且他在“编写”的定义上感到困惑。他甚至都没有阅读他的 LLM 生成的 Rust 代码。

The Hey Next numbers are similarly problematic. There’s no questioning that Rust is a more performant language than Ruby, but it’s another unfair comparison.

Hey Next 的数据同样存在类似问题。毫无疑问,Rust 是一种比 Ruby 更具性能的语言,但这是另一种不公平的比较。

更进一步:量化金融体系

看懂新闻只是起点——沿量化金融路径,把它变成能交付的工程能力

进入量化体系 →

关联讨论

同一事件的更多信源

相似阅读

关联信息,但可能不是同一事件