simkoc
commented
4 years ago I also wonder whether changing from &rest to &optional improves performance for most users? The listed use case is actually none I ever thought of, but now I have to do major code changes. Highly inconvenient. A simple alias function (i.e., high-performing-execute) being called by execute with the now list would have sufficed.
However, enough complaining. This library is great and I highly depend on it. Thus, thanks for the great work.
It's nice that there's a higher performance version of execute now, but this could have been done by adding a new function and preserving the old behavior. Now I have to update my code and make sure that my systems are using the latest and greatest. At a minimum this sort of API-breaking change should have been 1) more loudly announced and 2) accompanied with a version number increment.
Don't know how widely supported this is "in the wild" yet, but my preferred path would be to back this out and use new function names.