Message22179
Logged In: YES
user_id=6656
Argh argh argh.
This is a result of fixing bug #963956. While the fix was well-
intentioned, I don't know if it's really the right thing... I suspect
putting a more informative message in module_new might suffice.
Raymond's way of fixing the bug also neatly (and
presumbably accidentally) sidestepped the tests that attempted to
make sure you got a decent error message for this.
Raymond, what do you think? I don't think the check in
ceval.c:build_class can survive as is. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2007-08-23 14:25:39 | admin | link | issue1014215 messages |
2007-08-23 14:25:39 | admin | create | |
|