That is static typing. You can add static types to a dynamic language, but then you introduce a compilation step. This is not an argument in favour of dynamic t

That is static typing. You can add static types to a dynamic language, but then you introduce a compilation step. This is not an argument in favour of dynamic typing. If your language requires a compilation step anyway, then what you have is a static language with only one type: the ‘any’ type. Every argument I’ve seen in favour of dynamic typing is some variation of “I like it this way.” They’re not technical arguments because dynamic typing is a strict subset of a statically typed language, equivalent to passing a flag to turn the type checker off. Sure, not every compiler offers such a flag, but that is an argument against one particular static language (or group of languages), not an argument against static types itself.