-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 60
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[s1, s2, s3, ...] as spec should be equivalent to [(s1, s2, s3, ...)] #220
Comments
great question :-) early on we couldn't decide what the correct behavior should be; agree, we should throw an error rather than silently ignoring the later items one example, we don't want the behavior to be EXACTLY the same as if we can talk through it more and convince ourselves that there isn't a better purpose for list-of-specs than to basically have tuple-like behavior we can give it that behavior |
As far as I can tell, the behaviour of a
[...]
spec (inAuto
mode) with more than one element in the list is not documented anywhere in the docs, and it certainly isn't very friendly. I continuously bump into this, and then spend a lot of time debugging the problem, before I realise what the issue is.The current behaviour seems to be that for a spec of
[s1, s2, s3, ...]
, anything beyonds1
will be silently ignored and have absolutely no effect. That is both unexpected, and very unfriendly to the user, because it makes the debugging experience mystifying. Especially sinceInspect()
will also get ignored, ie.:Is there a reason it isn't equivalent to
[(s1, s2, s3, ...)]
, and could it be changed to be equivalent? If not, at the very least it should throw an error, but I really think it should be allowed and meaningful.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: