On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 02:54:51PM +0100, Julian Foad wrote: > Looks like the "remove" part was accidentally lost in r1685793 (June 2015, > after 1.9 was branched). > > Anyone want to investigate further and fix? > > - Julian
Thanks for spotting this! Could we just revert r1685793 for now? I think that would be the safest option. The change looks like a micro-optimization to me.
