[17:22:13] <jackmcbarn>	 anomie: ping
[17:23:43] <anomie>	 jackmcbarn: pong
[17:24:00] <jackmcbarn>	 anomie: did you ever have any feedback on the argument translation thing i showed you a few weeks ago?
[17:24:41] <anomie>	 Just what I told you already: it seems like weird behavior with respect to back-translating pairs(). Forward translation seems like it's probably ok.
[17:24:59] <jackmcbarn>	 did you ever tell me that?
[17:25:10] <anomie>	 Yeah, on IRC when we first talked about it.
[17:25:17] * jackmcbarn digs through logs
[17:26:15] <jackmcbarn>	 anomie: i see you asked me about it. i don't see where you said what was weird about it though
[17:27:33] <anomie>	 jackmcbarn: That if you supply "foo=bar", then pairs() gives you foreign-for-foo where the code probably was still expecting to see foo.
[17:27:36] * anomie goes to lunch
[17:59:32] <jackmcbarn>	 anomie: when you're back, i remember the thing i actually meant to ask about that. the way i have it set up now, once you add translation, it will only accept the translated argument and will throw away the original one if it exists. should it accept both instead? (and if so, which one should it reveal in pairs()?)