> The blog sets up to address the "claim by proponents of dynamically typed programming languages" that "once you have unit testing static type checking is redu

> The blog sets up to address the "claim by proponents of dynamically typed programming languages" that "once you have unit testing static type checking is redundant". This is a strawman and I'm fairly sure it was a strawman in 2012 as well. In the past year I've seen at least half a dozen posts here on HN making this exact claim. Now I kind of wish I'd saved a few.