The quote: > Why didn't you have tests that caught the syntax errors? Static typing doesn't ensure correctness for languages like C++ and Java. It seems like

The quote: > Why didn't you have tests that caught the syntax errors? Static typing doesn't ensure correctness for languages like C++ and Java. It seems like they is saying: "you have to write more tests, yes, but you have to write tests, anyway!" So if I have to write 20 tests in one language, and 200 in another, the difference in effort is negligible because I need to write tests anyway? So if you can express something in 10 times less code in one language compared to another, it doesn't really matter since "you would have to write some code, anyway!". I really don't get this 'you were going to write tests anyway [says who?], so you might as well write it for any possible unintended null-value, value-was-string-but-should-have-been-char, too long argument tuple in function call....."