Based on that study I would assert that tight static typing is more reliable than static typing that is full of holes.<p>It doesn&#x27;t speak to strong dynamic versus strong static at all.<p>Speaking of holes, of course dynamic typing can have holes also: if an interpreter or compiler misses a type check, the consequences are that the wrong operation is applied to an object. The result is corruption, crashing.<p>The correctness and completeness of a type scheme is orthogonal to static versus dynamic.