On Jul 9, 2008, at 09:39, Peter B. West wrote:

Jeremias Maerki wrote:
Am I the only one concerned about backwards-compatibility here?

It's not my *concern*, but deliberately breaking compatibility does seem pretty silly.

Yeah, so one night I thought: "Let's see if we can annoy everyone who has the bad habit of not using the readily provided base classes for extensions..." :->



Reply via email to