> assuming that the code will terminate (since intentional infinite loops are rare) and relying on tests and human reviewers to check for mistakes. This is a p

> assuming that the code will terminate (since intentional infinite loops are rare) and relying on tests and human reviewers to check for mistakes. This is a pretty labor-intensive, mechanical guarantee. If I had to run config changes through code review (like SBT configs, for example), then that slows down velocity considerably. Having a language for your config offer these guarantees means that any committer can safely make edits, without having to go through process.