On May 3, 8:31 am, Stephen Compall <[email protected]> wrote: > How do you feel about replacing the `field' arg with the `field-info' > structure object? You might rely on this if you use the `:type' kwarg > on any individual field of a `defview' (this is not about the :type for > the whole view).
Yes, but I'd rather keep API compatibility for the time being and then break it when Saikat comes up with his view changes. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "weblocks" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/weblocks?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
