Igor Djordjevic <igor.d.djordje...@gmail.com> writes: [...] >> > Hmm, still rushing it, but what about adding an additional step, >> > something like this: >> >> I think it's unneeded, as it should work fine without it, see another >> reply. > > Unfortunately, I have a broken test case saying different - it could > very well be a flawed test, too, but let`s elaborate in that > other sub-thread[1], indeed.
Yeah, I was too fast to reply and I was wrong, sorry about it. -- Sergey
