[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [sieve] Variable expansion issues

2009-10-22 11:26:46
Hi Ned,

NED+mta-filters(_at_)mauve(_dot_)mrochek(_dot_)com wrote:
I actually disagreed with the exclusion of variables from the first argument to
set here. But that's water long since under the bridge.


Since I disagree with the exclusion of set, I also am opposed to this
expansion. And even if I were to agree to this in principle (which I don't),
I would still object to this change on the grounds that it makes
currently conforming implementation nonconformant for no good reason.


I understand the logic behind such exclusions. I just don't agree that the
supposed benefits are worth the loss in flexibility.

Although I tend to agree with your appreciation for flexibility, I also value consistency. My implementation does not support constructing variable names with variable substitutions anywhere, since I assumed all variable name arguments to have similar requirements as the set command's variable name argument (e.g. for hasflag). Now I am wondering whether I should implement support for this anyway. Did you?

I think consensus on issues like these is very important to guarantee interoperability.


sieve mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>