On 2014-06-05 09:30, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I have to confess this echoes a few similar confusions I have about the
use and advocacy of dynamically-typed languages. One argument I've heard
a while back was that static type errors are not "proportional response"
and that static types only detect the most trivial of bugs, so why
bother at all. But then the heavy-handed approach to unittesting
espoused by dynamic languages, of which arguably a good part would be
automated by a static type system, seems to work against that argument.
Since the software we write today is so complex, even detecting the most
trivial bugs are useful. We need every help we can get.