Patch expected lengths

[liamhuber]

I think we just had an off-by-one error when touching up the script.

Closes #61

[niklassiemer]

Yes, sorry for the hiccup! Of course if len != n: False should translate to if len < n : False if we want to allow for larger n, I probably misjudged thinking about len == n: vs. len >= n+1.

[liamhuber]

Yes, sorry for the hiccup! Of course if len != n: False should translate to if len < n : False if we want to allow for larger n, I probably misjudged thinking about len == n: vs. len >= n+1.

I don't know how much culpability you intend to assume with the word "sorry", but I reviewed it so I refuse to let you take more than half 😂 It was a dumb mistake, but the fact is those are going to happen and they're why we have tests, so what I'm really learning from this is we need a better testing routine for this repo!