Erann Gat wrote:
> The�real�payback�from
> compile-time detection of type errors is not a reduced necessity for
> testing; it is instead merely a time savings, finding those errors
> sooner rather than later.
Well, there's also the fact that when you give a type to a term you have
a proof, and when you give a series of tests about the type of a term
you have a good probability, but not the rigorous proof, that those
errors won't come up. So besides the time savings there's something
more. Maybe I am ingenuous, because it's impossible that this argument
hasn't yet been told :)
V.