I cannot understand problem with argument of the function

[mrd]

On Wednesday, 18 September 2013 at 09:09:29 UTC, mrd wrote:
> On Wednesday, 18 September 2013 at 09:07:09 UTC, mrd wrote:
>
>>> Looks like data corruption.

I can not imagine what corruption was going on here: the fact 
that is contract gets the correct value, but the function itself 
- not. But they both should use same value source, yep?

>>> Can't help you much without a full piece of code that 
>>> *reproduces* the issue (reducing it helps too).