From: Mark D. B. <md...@gn...> - 2003-04-30 21:45:12
|
Bill Wohler <wo...@ne...> writes: > Thanks, Mark. > > Mark D. Baushke <md...@gn...> wrote: > > > +(defcustom mh-index-ticked-messages-folders t > > And mh-index-new-messages-folders should "go away" (although we probably > shouldn't actually nuke the variable until 8.0, but come up with a good > scheme for obsoleting variables and functions). Why? I believe that folks may want to have folders with "unseen" messages as separate from those with "tick" message sequences. > > - "[t]hread; [s]earch; [i]ndexed search;\n" > > + "[n]ew messages; [s]earch; [i]ndexed search;\n" > > Good catch. Did you really mean to nuke "[t]hread"? Let's add "': ticked > messages" and "se[q]uenced messages" (unless we come up with something > better). Yes, I really did mean to nuke [t]hread. There is no Ft binding, so the help string was broken. I thought about adding "[']ticked messages", but it looked strange to me. I was waiting for more input for "se[q]enced messages" as I did not add it. > > +(defun mh-index-sequenced-messages (folders sequence) > > "Display new messages. > > All messages from FOLDERS which are in SEQUENCE are displayed. > > By default the folders specified by `mh-index-new-messages-folders' are > > searched. With a prefix argument, enter a space-separated list of folders, or > > nothing to search all folders. > > > > -Argument SEQUENCE is optional to keep the function compatible with previous > > -releases where the `mh-unseen-seq' was assumed to be the sequence that the > > -function searched for." > > - (interactive > > - (if current-prefix-arg > > - (list (split-string (read-string "Search folder [all]? ")) > > - (mh-read-seq "Search for" nil mh-unseen-seq)) > > - (list mh-index-new-messages-folders mh-unseen-seq))) > > +Argument SEQUENCE defaults to `mh-unseen-seq' and is the sequence that the > > +function searches for in each of the FOLDERS." > > + (unless folders (setq folders t)) > > (unless sequence (setq sequence mh-unseen-seq)) > > This function should be interactive (with a "F q" keybinding) also and > *not* provide a default sequence. My opinon differs. The mh-indexed-sequenced-messages functions is presently the workhorse that does the job (it is probably the wrong name). An interactive front-end would be useful and could allow for some manner of specifying BOTH the list of folders to search and the sequence name to search, but should be separate from the front-end functions... > > +are searched. WIth a prefix argument, enter a space-separated list of > ^ typo Fixed. > > +are searched. WIth a prefix argument, enter a space-separated list of > ^ typo Fixed. > > + (interactive > > + (list (if current-prefix-arg > > + (split-string (read-string "Folders to search: ")) > > + mh-index-ticked-messages-folders))) > > I wonder if we can refactor these interactive phrases into > mh-index-sequenced-messages? You liked "Folders to search:" better than > "Search folder [all]" ? Well it does take a list... "Search folder [all]" seemed to be an all or nothing kind of prompt. I'll change it to "Search folder(s) [all]? " just for you. :-) It may be possible to refactor the interactive phrases, but I am headed to an afternoon full of meetings, so it will have to wait unless you want to do it right now. Enjoy! -- Mark |