On 11/28/07, Drew Smathers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Thanks, I've fixed the documentation in r1442 (there's no good reason > > for the current implementation, but neither is there a good reason to > > change it at this stage). > > > > I'll buy you a beer if you fix it. I mean ... the patch is dirt simple (see > attached). > > I guess it's a matter of correctness - testing if the return value isn't > None doesn't have the better semantics of zero/nonzero checking. If it did, > the one could do the following (which should be valid):
My apologies, from your original message I thought this _was_ the current behaviour, and I updated the documentation to describe it. I've now fixed the behaviour (r1448) to match the documentation (and your beer-- I mean, request), as it's clearly the most sensible option, and shouldn't affect existing code. Alex. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pyglet-users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pyglet-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
