On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 11:37:53PM +0200, Kristian Lein-Mathisen wrote: > A, of course, now I understand what you were trying to tell me previously. > That makes sense. Thanks for clarifying, Peter.
Glad my ramblings were helpful! > In my particular use-case, I am changing to a custom scheme and this "port > clear on scheme change" feature made me scratch my head for a while (but > that happens quite often, so is no indicator if whether the api is > intuitive or not!). So if we were to vote, it'd put my two cents on not > modifying the port unless explicitly stated (if it's already #f it's still > work like you'd expect). You're probably right, it's an example of "more magic" (the bad kind!). But this is a breaking change, so I'll have to think about it for a bit. If anyone on this mailinglist has strong opinions either way, please let yourselves be heard: now's the time to speak up. Cheers, Peter -- http://www.more-magic.net _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
