[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Nmh-workers] [PATCH] scan message numbers from stdin

From: Michael O'Dell
Subject: Re: [Nmh-workers] [PATCH] scan message numbers from stdin
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:47:16 -0400
User-agent: Thunderbird (Macintosh/20080707)

uh, "whitespace between message numbers" is parsed by the SHELL
not the MH commands. the commands never see whitespace unless
it's quoted


Eric Gillespie wrote:
Peter Maydell writes:

Is there any reason why it shouldn't allow any random whitespace between
message numbers?

Room for future expansion?  Folders with spaces in names?
I'm just used to thinking of newline-delimited rows, I guess.
I'm slightly against allowing spaces, but only slightly.  I guess
if I implement folder changing later, we could say not to put
message numbers after folders; anything between + and newline is
the folder name.

Peter Maydell writes:
I think that it would be nice if 'scan 4 1 2' actually output the messages
in the order stated on the command line. I also think that it would be
I, too, would rather 'scan 3 4' print the lines in that order
(first 3, then 4).
That it already does. The question is what it does (or should do) if you
say 'scan 4 3'.

Oops, of course I meant 'scan 4 3'.  Obviously 'scan 3 4'
couldn't possibly print the messages in any order but 3, 4 :).

Just for consistency (and because you'd probably want to implement it
by having common code for doing this).

I'll take a whack at it, as long as it doesn't mean refactoring
too much old, painful code.

less at least seems happy with
stdin being /dev/null, as does my editor, so I think that argument is
a red herring.

Huh, OK.  Bad assumption on my part.

Sounds good. (I couldn't remember whether nmh wrote sequences
in sorted order.)

Near as I can tell, it never deals with message numbers in
anything but sorted order, by the very nature of the structure it
uses for them.

line not being sorted either). [I appreciate that doing things this
way would be a fairly big change, though.]

We'll see.  I'll start with show; do you have any other commands
in mind?  I'm just not feeling foo | refile; I don't see any way
it's better than refile `foo`, unlike scan and show, where you
want to see immediate output.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]