On Wed, 2004-05-05 at 00:00 +0100, Richard.Hall wrote: > David,
>
> On Tue, 4 May 2004, David Woodhouse wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2004-05-04 at 21:33 +0100, Tony Finch wrote:
> > > Incorrect. After a sub-condition fails, subsequent parts of and{} are
> > > parsed but not evaluated.
> >
> > Hmm. I could have sworn I did this...
>
> You could well have done, if prior to 4.32 ...
OK, thanks for the info. There are enough discrepancies between my
understanding and the real world, even without the latter constantly
changing...
