Re: Barcheck warnings

[Han-Wen Nienhuys]

address@hidden writes:
> But this is getting complicated. IMHO the only important difference is 
> between 
> O(1) and O(# of bars), the rest is just cosmetics.
> 
> (and I hope the barCheckSynchronize can be defaulted to #t sometime in the 
> future if it works fine, barcheck failures is not exactly something you plan 
> to do :) )

With the new check, I suppose barCheckSynchronize is no longer
necessary, we can do away with it entirely.

This will be a slight problem for people that relied on its behavior
for faking partial measures.


-- 

 Han-Wen Nienhuys   |   address@hidden   |   http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen