[email protected] (Ludovic Courtès) skribis: > [email protected] (Taylan Ulrich "Bayırlı/Kammer") skribis:
[...] >> So in the worst case we can just turn that par-for-each into a for-each >> and still get benefits. > > Right. > > Mark, WDYT? > > I would say: go for it, and let’s switch back to ‘for-each’ if/when we > have evidence of things going wrong. So, Taylan, OK to push the latest version of the patch (the one in <[email protected]> if I’m not mistaken)! Thank you, Ludo’.
