On Aug 25, 2009, at 7:46, Matt Sergeant wrote:
I never understood why it did that. Any reason it can't return
either
undef or (preferably) a new Transaction object?
I don't really understand it either, and I fear that which I don't
understand, so I worry about taking it out and breaking some hackage
that depends no it :)
Yeah agreed. I think it'd be worth checking with Ask why he made it
this way.
It's 5 years ago (at least) that code was introduced - I doubt anyone
can remember anything from then. And actually, I think it was you
who made it that way[1]. :-) If it was me in the initial
implementation then it's even longer ago...
Let's just change it to be saner. Return an object or undef.
- ask
[1] Commit r292 / e6e2091ee0 - "Attempt to clean up circular refs
problems"
