On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 ned(_dot_)freed(_at_)mrochek(_dot_)com wrote:
do LISTSCRIPT, then delete one by one which requires more
Rather DELETESCRIPT a* which would remove all the scripts and
require only one server/
Sure, but that presupposes client interactions are at a premium here.
I don't think they are.
For GETSCRIPT, if I compare with 'cat'. I thought it is useful.
Useful in some abstract sense, perhaps. But I don't think the benefits
outweigh the costs.
All IMO, of course. Others may feel differently.
For what its worth, I agree that these features add significant
implementation complexities and don't see much benefit in the real world.
Its very rare that we see users with more than one script stored on the
server at any given time. Maybe this would change if there was an
"include" sieve functionality (actually, I seem to remember seeing a draft
for this at one point), but even then I don't see this being a frequent
Rob Siemborski | Andrew Systems Group * Research Systems Programmer
PGP:0x5CE32FCC | Cyert Hall 207 * rjs3(_at_)andrew(_dot_)cmu(_dot_)edu *
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----
GCS/IT/CM/PA d- s+: a-- C++++$ ULS++++$ P+++$ L+++(++++) E W+ N o? K-
w O- M-- V-- PS+ PE++ Y+ PGP+ t+@ 5+++ R@ tv-@ b+ DI+++ G e h r- y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK-----