[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Nmh-workers] about mhparam

From: Oliver Kiddle
Subject: Re: [Nmh-workers] about mhparam
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 01:21:27 +0100

markus schnalke wrote:
> I also spotted code that appears to be badly formated:
> -    } if (debug) {
> +    }
> +
> +    if (debug) {

Actually, looking at the code I suspect that the intention was for this
to be } else if (debug) { otherwise some things get duplicated. There's
a later else and why should you be allowed specific components together
with -all but not with -debug.

> Further more I wondered why mhparam has no default action. -all could
> be set if mhparam is called without arguments. Another possibility
> would be to print the default values from
>     static struct proc procs []
> in this case. Maybe there are reasons for the existing behavior.

Whenever a command takes a list, it can be useful if the default is to
do nothing because it makes it easier if you generate that list from a
script and the result might be empty. That's all I can think of.


reply via email to

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