[dragonwriter]

> So it's interesting to me that you're going the other way and saying that actually in big, messy systems that static types may hurt you.

In an overly-coupled late system, static typing increases the potential effect of excessive coupling in forcing changes to remote parts of the system when making what seems to be a point change. But that effect, while magnified by static typing,, is a product of coupling.

And static typing in that situation, OTOH, mitigates (as to out note static proponents are quick to point out) the chance of missing a change that will produce incorrect behavior.

On the gripping hand, reducing the excessive coupling gets to the root of the problem, while static v. dynamic is just choosing how to allocate pain that could be avoided with better architecture.

But languages are sexier than architecture.