[bnert]

Your point about underlying data structures is spot on, in my view.

> Last quip to reflect on. "What's true of every bug found in the field? ... It passed the type checker. ... It passed all the tests. Okay. So now what do you do? Right? I think we're in this world I'd like to call guardrail programming. Right? It's really sad. We're like: I can make change because I have tests. Who does that? Who drives their car around banging against the guardrail saying, "Whoa! I'm glad I've got these guardrails because I'd never make it to the show on time."

I've been avoiding bringing up this point/example, but this is what prompted me to start thinking more deeply about types and their tradeoffs. Great talk, IMO.