I'd love to see DScript one day ...

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 15 June 2016 at 13:17:46 UTC, Chris wrote:
> In my experience, statically typed languages prevent a lot of 
> silly and time consuming bugs by simply checking the type.

Yes, but I would put it more generally. Matching a program 
against a specification of constraints prevents a set of runtime 
errors and bugs. But providing the specification is also tedious.

You can have much stronger static verification of constraints 
than in C++/D. For instance check the various legal states and 
what transitions you can have between them.

I am certainly in favour of more static checks, but I am 
pleasantly surprised at what can be achieved with optional static 
analysis.