On Saturday 10 September 2011 21:56:26 Dan Kegel wrote: > Might want to define the new form as ok2_ or something > so we can defer changing the explicit uses of ok_(). I dislike the idea, it has the feeling of legacy cruft. Either way it is a fairly minor point - the main change that needs debating is whether we should print the function name or not.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
