On Thu, 17 Aug 2017 09:11:21 -0700, c...@zoffix.com wrote: > To me, it looks like a clear case for 6.d material. We made a promise > to users that we won't make changes that break 6.c-errata changes and > IMO the 6.c-errata roast changes due to this feature break that > promise.
Though, since it's a method, we get the whole "can't easily change behaviour of a method between languages" problem...
