3 ms·

Len works on any Sized. Upper only works on strings. There are lots of Sized, there's only one string.

• divs1210 7y ago
  I believe that was a reply to your question: > Interesting, what inconsistency?
  • joshuamorton 7y ago
    And my point is that there isn't an obvious inconsistency there. Sized is an interface, exposed via a function. String is a type, which has methods. Now yes, you can make an argument that everything is an interface ("upper-able"). But bleh, and this avoided problems like "is it .length or .length() or .size or .size()" as happened in some other languages.
    • lkrubner 7y ago
      This appears to be 2 different languages: "".upper() vs len("") The first appears to be an object oriented language such as Ruby or Javascript. The second appears to be some language with plenty of static or built-in functions, such as PHP or C. This is clearly inconsistent under any definition of inconsistent.
      • joshuamorton 7y ago
        So which would you prefer: upper([1,2]) (so `upper` is a static builtin) or being unclear on whether its "".len or "".length or "".size or "".size() Like I said, there is consistency: interfaces are given top level things (builtin functions, operators, language features/keywords), while object methods don't. To give a recent anecdote, Rust's `x.await`, which is more "consistent", but everyone is complaining because in most languages async interfaces are exposed via something like `await x` instead of an attribute/method-y thing.