> I'm not arguing with the behavior of broken(). I'm saying that since > this feature is undocumented it's entirely possible that it could get > removed in some future version of Windows*, so if we're not testing > the version we wouldn't know that it got removed. We were lucky to > stumble upon this thing in the first place, it's starting to look like > it's not actually the issue responsible for the slowdown bug for which > we are researching.
Except that an app already depends on the newer behavior, so Microsoft would have to maintain a quirk for the app if they wanted to change the behavior. Since the hypothetical future version of Windows with changed behavior doesn't yet exist, addressing that case seems rather premature. --Juan
