On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 15:47 +0000, Vincent Ladeuil wrote:
> [...] I misread it as being defined at the top level where no
> leading spaces won't break the reading.
Then I'd prefer to leave it as is, if it's OK with you. That's
how it was in the original, anyway...
On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 15:47 +0000, Vincent Ladeuil wrote:
> [...] I misread it as being defined at the top level where no
> leading spaces won't break the reading.
Then I'd prefer to leave it as is, if it's OK with you. That's
how it was in the original, anyway...
- Eric