Have language researchers gotten it all wrong?

[Daniel Keep]

Walter Bright wrote:
> 
> I tend to agree that dynamic languages work best for small projects. The
> larger it is, the more advantages accrue to static type checking.
> 
> The reality, though, is that programs most often start out as small
> ones, and grow!

I suspect that's why several dynamic languages are looking at, or are at
least interested in, adding optional static types.

That way, the code can be "locked down" as it grows.