|
|
|
|
|
|
by saulpw
1061 days ago
|
|
|
Which no client should/would have been using (given the error they would have received). Why would this new implementation be presumed incompatible, when any reasonable person would think this is an addition to the interface, and not a difference to the existing interface? |
|
|
No client could, even. He's talking about static types so it wouldn't have been possible even to express a caller not providing a value.