This whole discussion reminds me of http://tomasp.net/blog/2015/failures/ http://tomasp.net/blog/2015/failures/ . What I’ve noticed is that programmers are larg

This whole discussion reminds me of http://tomasp.net/blog/2015/failures/ http://tomasp.net/blog/2015/failures/ . What I’ve noticed is that programmers are largely divided into camps based on the cost they’re willing to pay to avoid runtime errors: Haskell/Rust developers tend towards one side while Erlang/CL/Clojure tend to the other. My experience is that if you make the edit->run->edit loop tight enough, you can recover a lot of the guarantees available through static checks via a couple of alternate techniques and, for some of us, the resulting workflow is a lot more pleasant way to spend the day than tweaking the code up front until the compiler accepts it.