On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 01:37:51PM -0800, Murphy McCauley wrote: > We could try to force the value to something arbitrary (it ends up getting > chopped off anyway), but we can't do that without constraining how subclasses > store/manipulate the value... this might be fine, but I'd rather not do it if > we don't have to. I think this is actually briefly how it worked and I > apparently removed it and then didn't fix the problem that caused. > > Thoughts?
This works fine for me. I'll send out v2 patches in a sec.
