> what David failed to mention is that in the last Board meeting, we encouraged him to put this into the trunk now, early in the release cycle. He asked for feedback multiple times before, and is asking for feedback again now, out of sheer politeness.
>
> So please, try this. It is a much cleaner and simpler implementation, which makes it faster, too. We want it. IMHO this should go in unless a *valid* objection is raised, meaning you should at least try it.

+1

Please appreciate the economy of looking at something that only
provides a nominal improvement.  I hope you did not see my temporary
objection as a true objection as much as a request to ensure there is
some community consensus.  With what you've just reported, it sounds
like we do, or at least its forming.  But we need to give users a bit
more coddling than that meager web page to help them understand what
they would need to do to change to a subsystem that is this critical.
The mention of the serializers is what I'm talking about, but what
data conversions are needed?  What algorithm conversions for apps?

One of the worst kinds of bug is one which calculates invalid data for
a particular application (due new assumptions), but doesn't actually
blow up, only to be discovered a long time later after potentially
pervasive damage.  Dave, could you see any potential for
different-calculations in yours to allow this sort of bug to creep
into an existing application?

Best,
  Chris