Re: Re: RE: changes

hi, i am speaking for the main branch. if the community decides that adding a function declaration can break anything then just do not commit this into 4.0.5 :) as far as i have seen many major changes have been made to 4.0.5. anyway it will work both ways except that calling the function with wrong args wont issue a warning (at least for gcc - i have seen compilers pretending to be more strict than needed and giving errors in such a condition). btw. a month ago Rasmus asured me that the change is in cvs but perhapse he has commited it to the wrong branch. b. > > the idea is that it would be better if the line above is included in > > exec.h... of course it works without it but at least i am not happy with it > > this way. > > You would be perfectly right, if we would be dealing with the > main branch of CVS. In the case of the release branch, many > people consider changes to be "bad" per default. So, if we > can release working code without applying any changes, we > usually prefer that route.