I have a little less experience, only 30 years, but I have to fully agree with you. Not sure why you got down voted (maybe the religious popularity crowd rearin

I have a little less experience, only 30 years, but I have to fully agree with you. Not sure why you got down voted (maybe the religious popularity crowd rearing its head). I have seen my share of "innovations" come and go, but I too fail to see the empirical evidence that most bugs/errors are caused by type mismatch. In fact, I would even go as far as to argue that in my experience the benefits of typed languages (and the class of bugs they prevent) do not outweigh the usually larger code size (and often even additional complexity). Maybe I've just tried the wrong languages, but I was never convinced of the great improvements usually promised. At the same time, I have seen other people twist and jump through hoops, while vigorously holding on to their conviction how all that is an improvement. Sure, some errors will move from run time to compile time with typed languages. But if those are a systemic problem in your code, you probably have even bigger things to worry about (the ones you already keenly pointed out). From a cynical point of view, I can understand why corporate entities would love typed languages (for the increased code size and complexity), but that's another story.