>Java and the log4j mess are similar. It's a statically typed language, but a poorly reviewed code base. The static typing didn't catch the security hole. And i

>Java and the log4j mess are similar. It's a statically typed language, but a poorly reviewed code base. The static typing didn't catch the security hole. And it's cost the US millions of dollars so far to fix it. This is a ridiculous statement and just really devalues everything you are saying. How is a vulnerability in a library that is completely orthogonal to typing relevant in this discussion. Static typing never claimed to cure programmer stupidity. Also when I say static typing I mean languages with good type systems, as much as people like to say typescript is bad because it's based on javascript, at least null errors are impossible if you are using strict mode unlike Java and Go where any variable could potentially be null and the compiler wont tell you if you have unhandled null cases.