[pklausler]

"Strongly typed" is not the same thing as "statically typed". Most dynamically typed languages are strongly typed, too. The distinction between static and dynamic type systems comes from whether type errors are caught at compilation time or run time.

Which basically settles the question for me as a programmer, anyway. Eliminating the possibility of a class of run time failures -- how can that not be a good thing?

[lolc]

I meant statically typed, thanks.

The question to me is not whether type checkers are useful tools, but at what point they become a hindrance. If I may rephrase your question: The programs rejected by the type checker, how can they not be bad programs?