On 11/27/2010 11:31 AM, bluestorm wrote:
> Reversing the specific
> 0-ary modification suggested by Alain is probably easier, as I suspect
> most users don't use that one much, but Alain probably makes use of it;

As I've been designated as the primary responsible for that uninspired 
change (I plead guilty), I guess it is my responsibility to state here 
that frankly, I don't give a damn. That said, enabling the warning by 
default sounds better to me than reverting the change or introducing a 
new syntax.


-- Alain