Re: More efficient "dbl_raise"

[Daniel J S. <dan...@ie...>]

Ethan Merritt wrote:

> I have no idea, because I can't for the life of me figure out what
> the issue is here.  What problem are you trying to fix?
> If there's no problem, just forget the whole thing.

Repeat:

 > Anyway, if we think that the dbl_raise() is the preferred route, all that need
 > be done is remove the comment "FIXME, is this needed?" and give a short
 > explanation why it is needed.

This will prevent anyone in the future from looking at this and asking "What 
needs to be fixed?", i.e., the same question you are asking, "because I can't 
for the life of me figure out what the issue is here."  That's the trap I fell in.

Dan