Re: The tricky issue of do()

On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 15:24:54 +0100, Dominic Hargreaves <dom@earth.li> wrote:

> I merged my doc patch from rt#130832 at the weekend. This should make
> the documentation consistent with current behaviour. Of course, it would
> need a further tweak if warnings were to be added.

Nice, thank you. :)


-- 
With regards,
Christian Walde

• The tricky issue of do() by Matt S Trout
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Christian Walde
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Dave Mitchell
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Sawyer X
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Graham Knop
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Christian Walde
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Dominic Hargreaves
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Dave Mitchell
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Matt S Trout
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Dave Mitchell
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Matt S Trout
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Dave Mitchell
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Matt S Trout
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Leon Timmermans
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Sawyer X
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Kent Fredric
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by David Nicol
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Sawyer X
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Christian Walde
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Leon Timmermans
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Todd Rinaldo
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Zefram
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Matt S Trout
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Karl Williamson
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Chad Granum
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Zefram
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Uri Guttman
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Bo Lindbergh
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by H.Merijn Brand
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by David Nicol
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Dan Book
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Kenichi Ishigaki
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Dan Book
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Kenichi Ishigaki
• Re: The tricky issue of do() by Sawyer X