Re: [SQLObject] Reversed ordering, again

[Randall R. <ra...@ra...>]

On Wednesday, November 12, 2003, at 12:07 PM, Ian Bicking wrote:

> On Nov 11, 2003, at 12:11 AM, Randall Randall wrote:
>> It may be that these are considered bugs, or simply weren't
>> yet implemented as documented; I don't know.  The lack of
>> response the other day suggests the latter. :)
>
> I think it was one of those 
> I-meant-to-look-at-it-more-closely-when-I-had-some-time-then-I-forgot 
> situations.  There was just a missing "return" in reversed().

Well, thanks for the fix! :)

> It should be fixed now in CVS.

...or in 0.5.1, from your announcement.

--
Randall Randall
ra...@ra...