I find quite interesting that people will prefer a highly malleable language like Python, and then orgs have to adopt testing to get around all the inconsistencies caused by absent type system. And then people will write libraries to get around the pesky tests to get their flexibility back.
It's fascinating really... Complex systems are always in partial failure mode and that applies to collective optimization challenges. Organizations will always be stuck in local optima in most domains.
Type systems do not replace testing, and if a test works after retrying it then it is probably not something that a type system would be able to catch.
Yes they are not equivalent, but creating languages without a strict type system and the proposition of test driven development are going back and fort in strictness. It is beneficial to have a more strict programming language, but it can be uncomfortable and burdensome. So I find interesting we keep going back and forth in this dimension.
It's fascinating really... Complex systems are always in partial failure mode and that applies to collective optimization challenges. Organizations will always be stuck in local optima in most domains.