> Your remarks apply only to cranking out new code. Static typing prohibits making fundamental changes to an existing body of code, like changing a core, widely

> Your remarks apply only to cranking out new code. Static typing prohibits making fundamental changes to an existing body of code, like changing a core, widely-used data structure. To make such a change, you have to be extremely sure that you want it and that you're doing it right. I’m reading this and I have just no idea what to say. With static typing you don’t have to be very considerate in this work, because you will have a compiler telling you if anything is broken, not to mention refactoring-tools which can help you reliably and automatically make those changes across your entire code base in a verified 100% correct way. With dynamic typing however, you just have to guess and pray. Clearly static typing is the superior option in this specific scenario where you are calling out static typing to be a disadvantage. So what am I missing?