[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Nmh-workers] Thoughts: header/address parsing
From: |
Ken Hornstein |
Subject: |
Re: [Nmh-workers] Thoughts: header/address parsing |
Date: |
Mon, 25 Aug 2014 23:14:15 -0400 |
>I see that, too. I'm not as concerned with the case of using the
>full terminal width. I think that we're more likely to break
>scripts that do something like this:
>
> if [ `scan -format $format -width 20` = $expected_output ]
>
>if we add one back to width now.
We've already broken that with multibyte character handling; personally,
I'd be fine with relaxing that requirement as well.
--Ken
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Thoughts: header/address parsing, (continued)
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Thoughts: header/address parsing, David Levine, 2014/08/24
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Thoughts: header/address parsing, Ken Hornstein, 2014/08/24
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Thoughts: header/address parsing, Ralph Corderoy, 2014/08/25
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Thoughts: header/address parsing, Ken Hornstein, 2014/08/25
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Thoughts: header/address parsing, Ralph Corderoy, 2014/08/26
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Thoughts: header/address parsing, Ken Hornstein, 2014/08/26
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Thoughts: header/address parsing, Ralph Corderoy, 2014/08/26
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Thoughts: header/address parsing, Paul Fox, 2014/08/26
Re: [Nmh-workers] Thoughts: header/address parsing, David Levine, 2014/08/25
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Thoughts: header/address parsing,
Ken Hornstein <=
Re: [Nmh-workers] Thoughts: header/address parsing, David Levine, 2014/08/25