> have more than a few developers and a few tens of thousand lines of code, the benefits of strict typing become rapidly apparent. The argument is that compreh

> have more than a few developers and a few tens of thousand lines of code, the benefits of strict typing become rapidly apparent. The argument is that comprehensive test suites can substitute for strict typing. I don't buy it as practical, but that's the argument, and I can at least see the reasoning. The other point is that you can avoid tens of thousands of lines of code and lots of developers in dynamic languages. You're way more likely to keep the thing in a form where two or three guys have it all in their heads and can keep it small and well factored. Strict typing is critical when you're making changes to code you don't understand really well. But you're more likely to understand all the code really well when it's small and you're on a small team.