Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Aubrey has a point here. The tradition to which you refer has not
> historically included so-called "error objects".
There is no reason to treat them specially in this regard.
--
__("< Marcin Kowalczyk
\__/ qrczak@xxxxxxxxxx
^^ http://qrnik.knm.org.pl/~qrczak/