Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

[Ben Finney]

Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed at ix.netcom.com> writes:

> On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 00:09:40 +0000 (UTC), Steven D'Aprano
> <steve+comp.lang.python at pearwood.info> declaimed the following:
>
> >Or more realistically, suppose you want your type system to ensure
> >that you don't lay off the wrong workers:
> >
> >"employee records where the length of employment is greater than six
> >months but less than five years, AND the salary is greater than
> >$100,000 or less than $40,000, AND the average number of paid sick
> >days taken per year over the last three years is less than five, AND
> >the number of reprimands is zero in the last year and less than two
> >in the last five years, AND the position in the last two stack
> >rankings was in the top fifty percent"
> >
> 	That's not a data type -- that's an SQL query...

If that isn't part of the definition of the data type, then *the type
checker is not going to help* to determine whether the code lays off the
wrong workers.

> 	The data type is still "employee"

I think you're agreeing with Steven. Static data types are not relevant
for finding most of the bugs a program can have.

-- 
 \         “The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is |
  `\       able to think things out for himself, without regard to the |
_o__)          prevailing superstitions and taboos.” —Henry L. Mencken |
Ben Finney