Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Ummm. Why exactly was this set of changes committed? It may seem > trivial, but it's an API change since you're renaming functions.
Sorry, it seemed trivial and non-controversial because it's a new API in 3.0, avoids confusion, lock-in after 3.0 final, and, well, misspelling a function name would be embarrassing. Daniel -- Daniel Quinlan http://www.pathname.com/~quinlan/
