[falcolas]

Come back to me when the most used programming languages have a type system like Haskell's. Then we can talk about the benefits of static typing over dynamic typing. Until then, static typing is mostly "expected a HashMap<i32, u64>, got a HashMap<i64, u64>" or other pedantic stuff like that which is only really meaningful to the compiler.

[andrewflnr]

> Come back to me when the most used programming languages have a type system like Haskell's.

We never get there if the conversation about types is dominated by people who have only used Java-like type systems. Even ignoring that, demanding that powerful type systems be ubiquitous before discussing their benefits is a complete non sequitur. There's no excuse for ignorance, here.

[srtjstjsj]

You are confusing "static typing" with "algebraic typing", which is related but different.