What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
David Heinemeier Hansson (DHH), the creator of Ruby on Rails, is facing criticism in online Rails and Elixir discussions after commentary about his Rails World 2026 keynote described him advocating agent-written code and a planned HEY rebuild with native clients and a Rust backend. The criticism is about both what that plan signals to Rails developers and whether comparisons between language implementations were fair. The available sources document particular commenters’ reactions—not a community-wide consensus or a verified benchmark showing Rust is superior.
What DHH reportedly said at Rails World 2026
Commentary about the September 23, 2026 keynote says DHH described 37signals as having gone “pencils down” on handwritten implementation code and discussed rebuilding HEY with native client applications and a Rust backend. LaunchKit reproduced wording it attributed to a post DHH made about the talk, while explicitly saying the quotation was read from that post rather than verified against the keynote recording. It should therefore be treated as reported post wording, not a transcript-verified quote.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
“It’s pencils down, people. Writing code by hand is no longer an economically viable skill for most programmers at most companies. But the future of making software has never been brighter. Don’t you dare black pill this beautiful moment!”
Special offer. See more information about Outbyte and uninstall instructions. Please review EULA and Privacy policy.
LaunchKit’s September 24 account also says a reported HEY capacity claim combined a Rust backend rewrite with a move to native clients. The account does not provide published benchmark methodology or hardware that would isolate the effect of Rust. Demóstenes García’s September 28 commentary on the keynote likewise describes the native-client and Rust-backend plan, and says DHH did not announce that Rails was dead.
#1 Best Overall
Why the comments turned critical
A Rails conference, and a flagship product moving away
One source of unease is the apparent contrast between speaking at a Rails conference and describing a plan for HEY that would use native clients and a Rust backend rather than Rails. García characterized the moment this way: “What he did was more uncomfortable: standing in front of a room full of people who make their living with Rails, he said he no longer needs it for one of his flagship products.” That is García’s interpretation, not DHH’s wording or an announcement that Rails is being discontinued.
Questions about comparisons among implementations
An October 5 r/rails discussion titled “DHH keeps promoting Rust” included commenters’ objections to how the Elixir version accessed its database and delivered messages compared with Rust. An October 6 r/elixir discussion alleged that the implementations were built under unequal conditions: commenters claimed the Rust effort had more contributors, commits and optimization time, while Elixir and Go were closer to one-shot efforts. These are claims made in those discussions; the posts do not independently verify project histories or establish that the versions were functionally equivalent.
Rank #2
The discussions identify the kinds of information needed to judge a language comparison: contributor experience and time, implementation history, optimization effort, functional parity, database and concurrency design, test coverage, workload, hardware, and whether the client architecture changed. The available accounts do not provide independently verified data sufficient to assess those dimensions or score the implementations.
Does this establish that Rust is faster than Rails, Elixir or Go?
No. The available reporting does not establish a fair, methodologically documented head-to-head benchmark proving that Rust outperformed Rails, Elixir or Go. A capacity figure attributed to HEY cannot settle that question on its own: the reported change bundled a backend rewrite with a move to native clients, and the account does not publish the benchmark method or hardware needed to attribute the result to a particular language.
Rank #3
That distinction matters because a product’s performance can reflect architecture and implementation choices as well as language. Without comparable workloads, equivalent behavior, disclosed test conditions and a clear account of the changes, the online allegations about effort and implementation design remain unresolved—not proof that either side’s version was better.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.What the backlash does—and does not—mean for Rails
The reaction reported so far is a set of visible online criticisms, including one r/rails thread and one r/elixir thread, not a representative measure of Rails developers’ views. The controversy concerns the implications of DHH’s reported comments and the fairness of language comparisons; it is not evidence that Rails is being shut down. García explicitly notes that DHH did not say Rails was dead. A plan to use a different stack for HEY is not, by itself, a verdict on Rails for other projects or teams.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
Recommended Free Tools
