min() function anomalies

[Richard Gaskin]

Shari wrote:
> What bothers me more is that somewhere along the way, it was * 
> changed *.  This is a very fundamental change.  I do not know if the 
> change occurred before the MC/Rev merger or after.  But either way, I 
> wouldn't have expected it.

I agree that any change to a token's behavior should be documented.  If 
it changed during RunRev's tenure, it should be noted in their 
Dictionary entry for the min token.

I do see one change there noted as introduced in v1.1, but that's for 
something else.  I don't see any mention of this change in their docs.

Shari, I'd suggest submitting this as a documentation request to BZ.  It 
may be minor, but it's still worth addressing to keep people well 
informed, esp. those who've used earlier versions or are have HyperCard 
experience.

-- 
  Richard Gaskin
  Managing Editor, revJournal
  _______________________________________________________
  Rev tips, tutorials and more: http://www.revJournal.com