Re: length() of an atom
- Posted by mattlewis (admin) Jul 26, 2010
- 1747 views
Salix said...
DerekParnell said...
Yes. The 'it' being that they have the same length.
I understand that it is the goal of the proposal. It is just strange for me to have a length. Probably I am too much influenced by the current error message: "length of an atom is not defined". I get it regularly... 
This is a good point, and I had a similar reaction when I first considered this.
In a case where you really expected or needed a sequence, the bug in the code would a a little bit more difficult to find. It might be discovered shortly after, when something else expected a sequence. Or it could lead to silently corrupting data. Of course, all of this is theoretical, and doesn't mean the change is wrong. Just something to be considered.
Matt
