[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Nmh-workers] Request for new command: addresses

From: norm
Subject: Re: [Nmh-workers] Request for new command: addresses
Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 07:34:27 -0700

David Levine <address@hidden> writes:

>> There are still a couple of minor problems:
>>      As I commented earlier, in this thread, there is nothing to prevent
>>      some future version of repl using a different prompt. One way
>>      to prevent that would be to put "Reply to:" in the man page.
>>      I herewith request that.
>How's this?
>   The  -query switch modifies the action of -nocc type switch by interac-
>   tively asking you if each address that normally would be placed in  the
>   "To:"  and  "cc:"  list should actually be sent a copy.  This is useful
>   for special-purpose replies.  The prompt format is
>        Reply to address?
>   That prompt will not change, so that scripts can rely on it.  Note that
>   the  position  of  the  -cc and -nocc switches, like all other switches
>   which take a positive and negative form, is important.
>("address" in the prompt is italicized.)  I also added a comment
>to the code.  It's just on master:  if OK, I don't see a reason
>not to add this to 1.6.
>>      repl returns a non-zero exit code because of the the "-editor false"
>>      arguments , as well as to actual errors, such as an
>>      unreadable message. The script blissfully ignores the latter.
>>      I don't think that problem is worth pursuing.

>It would be really easy to have repl exit with status of 2
>instead of 1 for the "-editor false" case or any other failure
>of the editor.  But if we're going to touch that, I think that
>we should consider passing back the exit status from the editor
>(or attempt to invoke the editor, so return 127 if not found).
>editfile() currently maps any failure to a status of -2,
>starting at line 734 in uip/whatnowsbr.c.  Its callers map that
>to 1.  (buildfile() maps it to -1 but its caller ignores the
>return value.)

If you did that, then you should do for all of the composition commands.

I wonder, though, if would be less trouble to write a C program, starting with
the repl source, for an addresses command then trying to modify repl to
support a very clever and ingenious script approach to using repl. It would
certainly be cleaner. Also, if that were done, then incorporating the -cc and
-nocc options of repl would be natural, and I except, easy.

    Norman Shapiro

reply via email to

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