From: Stephen Viles (sviles_abi@iinet.net.au)
Date: Fri Sep 19 2003 - 04:14:39 EDT
19/09/03 5:59:34 PM, tomasfrydrych@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>On 18 Sep 2003 at 16:03, Mark Gilbert wrote:
>
>> I reverted martin's win32 charwidths patch (that was based on Tomas'
>> comments).
>
>My understanding from reading the relevant thread was that the
>Steven's comments about regression were based on sourece
>_without_ the patch applied.
>
>Tomas
Sorry, I wasn't clear. What I meant was that I did not apply
the patch because I already knew that it caused a regression.
So now that the patch has been reverted, my observations are still
current - they weren't caused by the patch because I never applied it.
Apologies for the confusion (and for any further confusion due to
the above attempt at explanation.. ooh dear, it's getting difficult...)
Cheers - Stephen.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Sep 19 2003 - 04:26:17 EDT