Hi Steve, > No it was just a mistake, I meant it is as if with_actions is always > given - I find the terminology very confusing! I would prefer that > continue not change the normal effect of the actions and there be a > without_actions (or no_carry_forward or no_propagate which would be more > descriptive of what happens) command that prevented the carry forward. > > But no, I am not going to change anything unless you all want the change.
Although I "invented" with_actions, I have no problem with you inverting it if you think that would be better. At the time, it seemed like a reasonable solution to the problem of actions always being executed when using continue. Cheers, Mark _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
