Phillip J. Eby schrieb: > At 10:01 PM 3/6/2007 +0100, Martin v. Löwis wrote: >> It's unfortunate, of course, that people apparently relied on >> this behavior > > I was going to say it's the *documented* behavior, but I see that the > documentation is actually such that it could be interpreted either way. > > However, since it's not documented more specifically, it seems perfectly > reasonable to rely on the implementation's behavior to resolve the ambiguity. Sure, it is an incompatible change, no doubt. However, incompatible changes are "ok" for feature releases (not so fo bugfix releases). So this being an incompatible change alone is not a reason to reject the patch. Significant breakage in many applications might be, but I don't expect that for this change (which is really tiny). Regards, Martin
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4