> Also, the notion that because Haskell has a strong type system you don't need tests is a persistent myth. It's nice to have types to prove certain aspects of

> Also, the notion that because Haskell has a strong type system you don't need tests is a persistent myth. It's nice to have types to prove certain aspects of your program, but you still need a test suite in any significant project. I think that given a strong type system there exist tests you might otherwise write that you don't need. And I think that is sometimes confused for "given a strong type system, all tests are unnecessary" (which, in my opinion/experience, certainly does not hold), both by some people advocating type systems and by some people reacting to advocacy of type systems.