静的型付け言語の優位性

Anyway, read Guido's take and especially the comments. Here is one I found particularly interesting, from David Pollak, the creator of Lift:

But, unlike my Ruby code, [with Scala] I only need 50%-60% test coverage (vs. 95% coverage) to have stable, deployable code.

This is an angle that I have often been defending in the debate that pits statically against dynamically typed languages, but it's the first time that I come across such strong evidence.

Otaku, Cedric's weblog: Guido on Scala

動的言語と異なり、Scalaではテストカバレッジが50,60%で安定したコードになったよ、と(動的言語では90%)。