Jun 5, 2013, 3:45:25 PM6/5/13
I believe I have found an interesting assertion that may deserve better
error checking. I have already sent an email to Thiadmer, but I thought it might be of some use to the community.
It turns out that if you use a number for a symbolic subscript that is NOT the first subscript, it throws an assertion.
However, if this is the first subscript, it throws proper errors. Here
is a small example the exhibits the problem:
new field[.type, .0] //throws assertion
//new field[.0, .type] //throws error 29: invalid expression
This happened to me when I accidentally had a #define that shared the same symbol name as a subscript symbol.