@steve: you're out of scope

@Tim, I'm quite sure that people out there don't read documentation
too much. Milkbox has been out for some years and I've tons of support
emails that tell me this fact. And I really do not have time to answer
too much mails. I wanna do that options check mainly for myself.. :P
But hey, again, you're code suggestion is quite interesting. options.A
|| options.B could do the job. I'll try, thank you.



On 20 Dic, 11:08, Tim Wienk <[email protected]> wrote:
> I guess you could just document that options.B==true implies
> options.A==true, and when checking for options.A, check (options.A ||
> options.B).

Reply via email to