Scott Swank wrote: > We're happy to share if folk like this approach. N.B. that the .to() > call is for readability rather than out of any necessity.
I'm quite interested in this. This looks like it is just crazy and clever enough to be really useful :-) Thanks! Carl-Eric --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
