Re: [Nmh-workers] Relative Message Numbers

[norm]

David Levine <address@hidden> writes:
>Norm wrote:
>
>> If foobar is a message sequence then something like forbar+3, for
>> the third message of foobar, would make my life a bit easier.
>>
>> Even better, would be to allow forbar+3,4 and foobar
>> forbar+3-5. Then, recursively, and perhaps a bit fancifully, since
>> forbar+3-5 is a message sequence, forbar+3-5+2 would be
>> meaningful. If foobar has had a least four messages it would denote
>> the fourth messages of foobar.
>
>I agree with Robert and Ken.
>
>The shell function below is another way to handle the simple
>case:  pn forbar 3 4
>
>Or, load each of the message numbers into a bash array and do
>all kinds of fancy things with those.
>
>I just don't think that native support would be useful enough
>to justify the complexity.
>
>David
>
>
># first argument is sequence name
># second argument is n'th message of sequence
># optional third argument is number of messages, default 1
>function pn {
>pick $1 | tail -n +$2 | head -${3:-1}
>}

This comes very close to meeting my needs -- much better than the folder trick. 
I will try it for a few week to see how it goes. Certainly, at this a point in 
my life, I could never have come up with it. Thank you very much.


    Norman Shapiro