Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> If we all agree that die() is a better action, that must be done >> now, or it will become never once the change is released to the >> field. > > Because someone might have been relying on the current behavior of > segfaulting to stop their script? And a mere warning() would break > things for them by having the script "work" if this patch were to make > it into a release? No, because someone WILL start rely on the warning() behaviour, expecting that the "fixed" command will now run to completion without exiting with non-zero status. Once that happens, it will become impossible to flip it to die().
