> ...we don't have much data to judge, but the little that we have such as this article indicate that dynamic typing has a non-negligible negative impact on the

> ...we don't have much data to judge, but the little that we have such as this article indicate that dynamic typing has a non-negligible negative impact on the above. In my own experience I see it on a spectrum: there are design decisions you can avoid by using dynamic typing that give you speed in the small that start to show their absence in the large. Savings on inputs (quicker coding), tend to evaporate as complexity grows because you're using so much time analysing outputs (the system), to determine behaviour. Every bit of up-front work saved gets amortised across issue after issue, and runtime testing during development, and increasing stagnation in high-level architecture. For me the ideal is the type system of Haskell with the linguistic power of Haskell and the type inference of Haskell... only on a mainstream platform I can convince management to use.