This reminds me very much of a similar discussion from the distant past.
Human perception is colored by expectations. Transposed letters, misspellings, and wrong punctuation are all easy for a human reader to miss because our perception is geared to fill in for the unexpected. We are all aware of these internet memes that build on the understanding that any misspelled word is readable provided it starts and ends with the correct letter, and has all of the other letters that are required somewhere in the middle, regardless of order.
Real time syntax highlighting and linting helps to expose those errors when they can be easily resolved, when the programmer is still thinking about the problem at hand. By preventing extra effort and distraction, it is a direct aid to understanding.
Compile time linting is better than nothing, but I remember spending hours poring over lint print outs for C programs (yep - C, not C++, not even ANSI C) for hours, making one edit, then rerunning the lint to find the next error. It was better than nothing, but not by much.
The programming language is a tool, not an end in and of itself. Each language expresses specific thought patterns more effectively than the others. In industry, it is not uncommon for me to pick up a language just enough to accomplish a particular task and never work with it again.
Anything that reduces the time I need to spend learning the language is a benefit to me. Conversely, any language that I spend enough time in, I will learn in some depth.
I would expect the same to apply to students, since in this field we are always students.
The Long Stories - read at your own risk
I think it was the 1980's (or early 1990's), the same question was asked about the use of debuggers. Conventional wisdom was that the debugger would interfere with the reasoning process and students would not learn the material. A few rebels in academia held that in industry solving the problem faster was what was paying the bills, so debuggers should be used in classes just like in industry.
Ultimately, since this was a discussion in academic circles, someone (hey it's been a few decades, sorry no citation) did a controlled study where an entry level CS class was taught by a professor, half the lab classes were required to use the debugger, and half were required to NOT use the debugger.
Much to everyone's surprise, not only did the use of the debugger not impede student grasp of the material, it actually gave them deeper insights into what the system was doing when they ran code.
Fast forward three decades or so, there is a reason that we use syntax highlighting.
I learned programming on teletype and monochrome terminals, and I'm usually oblivious to color, so when I ran into an issue where my syntax highlighting didn't work I figured "no problem, I'm olde schoole" and went to work. It took me about 2 minutes to realize that without the syntax highlighting, the code that was nicely formatted to the language manual was nearly unreadable.
If I, having learned before syntax highlighting was an option and with decades of continuous industry experience, have trouble reading code without syntax highlighting, I pity the poor novice.