> There's a pleasure to solving problems that arise from type systems akin to solving Sodoku puzzles. IMO, That's not type system but OOP. Where I have problem

> There's a pleasure to solving problems that arise from type systems akin to solving Sodoku puzzles. IMO, That's not type system but OOP. Where I have problems with types is usually due to class hierarchies, and developers trying to invent "beautiful" taxonomies and abstractions for the sake of abstractions. I guess generics sometimes come as a cludge too, particularly if they are combined with the above OOP issues. In a typical bussiness/app code if you don't use inheritance or keep it to minimum, and use generics where they belong, static typing is rather mindless. "This needs something that implements interface ServiceA, and a string" and then a bit of familiarity with handling collections and "Options". From my experience, it's only sudoku puzzles if you (code author) make it so. Not very unlike the opposite version when people go very wild with abilities of lack/dynamic typing.