> Elm, again, forces you to write runtime type validation But it does not force you to handle failures correctly (as your lazy programmer example proves). Forc

> Elm, again, forces you to write runtime type validation But it does not force you to handle failures correctly (as your lazy programmer example proves). Forcing you to handle a Left value from an Either type is not the same as forcing you to handle a Left value correctly. Elm doesn't save you from bad failure handling, which is what the post I replied to claimed. What Elm does do is remind you that you should handle failures, which I think is very valuable and I'm not arguing against (and is what you're arguing for). But you still need to write a correct handler, and Elm won't force you to do that!