: Thats not new in this release, there were perf improvements committed by : mikemccandless before, too.
Seriously? ... i don't remember this at all ... which releases? It just seems like a really bad habit to get into -- users should have a reasonable expectation that code the "worked" in X.Y.Z will still work exactly the same way in X.Y.(Z+1) ... it's only the broken code that should change. -Hoss
