8 Aug
2012
8 Aug
'12
10:47 a.m.
Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan@gmail.com> wrote:
It does place a constraint on consumers that they can't assume those fields will be NULL just because they didn't ask for them, but I'm struggling to think of any reason why a client would actually *check* that instead of just assuming it.
Can we continue this discussion some other time, perhaps after 3.3 is out? I'd like to respond, but need a bit more time to think about it than I have right now (for this issue). Stefan Krah