On 25 November 2013 23:27, Mike Stump <mikest...@comcast.net> wrote: > Certainly it is reasonable to include this, and by doing this, one doesn't > have to worry if another header changes to not include it. > > Ok for the patch directly below?
OK.
On 25 November 2013 23:27, Mike Stump <mikest...@comcast.net> wrote: > Certainly it is reasonable to include this, and by doing this, one doesn't > have to worry if another header changes to not include it. > > Ok for the patch directly below?
OK.