This article is nice to read, but I believe that some of the arguments are quite flawed. I doubt that empirical evidence is helpful in this context. Some ref

This article is nice to read, but I believe that some of the arguments are quite flawed. I doubt that empirical evidence is helpful in this context. Some references to studies are used to make bold statements. The ones on static vs dynamic typing for example, may look scientific, but scanning GitHub repositories or comparing student assignments does not convince me much about professional applications. It just seems nearly impossible to say something evidence based about this topic. Perhaps rewriting the entire Linux kernel along with all its drivers in Rust might be a nice approach. If it were done in parallel, starting in 1991. Also, applying results from studies in one domain to another is a red flag to me: if productivity drops for construction crews working extra hours, I fail to see how one can conclude that the same holds for software developers. Of course the conclusion is likely, but I don't need a scientific paper for that. The study was from 1980, mind you. Too bad, because the premise is really interesting and thought provoking. Focusing on the human factor in software development makes a lot of sense.