Re: 'table' as fallback for tables

[Philipp Janda <siffiejoe@...>]

Am 30.06.2016 um 16:56 schröbte steve donovan:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 4:11 PM, Philipp Janda <siffiejoe@gmx.net> wrote:
> > We are not talking about the length of *any* table, but about the initial
> > length that can be derived from a table literal.
>
> Since this can be different from the sequence length, it would be very
> confusing!

The sequence length is confusing on its own. That's why we are having 
this discussion. Also, it _has_ to be different in some cases if we want 
to support `nil`s in arrays. But of course you could in principle use 
the current sequence length algorithm to calculate the initial length 
(but I think that would be a poor choice and a lost opportunity).

Philipp