> Lots of valid code, won't pass the type checker. That is the problem with static type checkers. I fail to see this as a problem. It's pretty much a feature,

> Lots of valid code, won't pass the type checker. That is the problem with static type checkers. I fail to see this as a problem. It's pretty much a feature, just as you don't expect object oriented languages to tolerate any shit you throw at them when you use the OO model. > I just don't think static typing is the silver bullet that many of its proponents think. You're the one making the case here, before answering it. > Haskell e.g. is just terrible at doing numerical work I've had good experience with https://wiki.haskell.org/Numeric_Haskell:_A_Repa_Tutorial https://wiki.haskell.org/Numeric_Haskell:_A_Repa_Tutorial