Well I can live with the workaround, it is not even to cumbersome. However, I
intuitively assumed it would be available, tried it and it was not. Anyway, I
think it is consistent with the logic of the system, so it would not hurt.
+1
On Oct 3, 2013, at 2:56 , Eric Gallager wrote:
> I have a
I have actually wanted something like this in base for a while now, and
just forgot to open a ticket about it...
On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> On Oct 2, 2013, at 16:49, Eric Gallager wrote:
>
> > If it's so easy to work around it, then that means it should be pretty
> ea
On Oct 2, 2013, at 16:49, Eric Gallager wrote:
> If it's so easy to work around it, then that means it should be pretty easy
> to add an alias or something that does the same thing as the workaround in
> base, right?
It would be implemented differently in base -- copy the -append implementation
