> Static checking burdens the developer with thinking more, etc. -- for sure.
I'm not sure I agree. Most type languages as implemented in common programming languages are bad at describing abstraction. This means that if you're programming in one of these languages, you are forced to reduce your level of abstraction (which is sometimes touted as an advantage).
And just because someone's smart enough to find working out how to satisfy the type checker an enjoyable challenge, doesn't mean they're dumb enough to think that just because it's fun it is always a good use of their time.
I'm not sure I agree. Most type languages as implemented in common programming languages are bad at describing abstraction. This means that if you're programming in one of these languages, you are forced to reduce your level of abstraction (which is sometimes touted as an advantage).
And just because someone's smart enough to find working out how to satisfy the type checker an enjoyable challenge, doesn't mean they're dumb enough to think that just because it's fun it is always a good use of their time.