Do people like the idea of:
- A dedicated function %(localmbox)
- A pseudo component %{localmbox}
I prefer the dedicated function. As far as I can tell, we don't have any
other pseudo components. It would seem counter-intuitive. If we really
need to call proper on the result, would it not be possible to somehow
allow proper to be more flexible in the form of its argument.
Actually, there _is_ at least one pseudo component; repl supports a
"user" pseudo component. AFAICT, this is not documented anywhere, nor
am I sure that it is used. But I understand what you mean; it's a bit
weird. Well, many things use the "text" pseudo-component, but that's
sort of a special case.
We could maybe make %(proper) take an expr; I'd have to look at it. Might
be better to have a function turn a string into a mailbox.
- Extra primitives to build the default local mailbox (%(myname),
%(myhost)).
Well I never like the use of `my' in these things because it sounds
cheesy. I'd prefer functions names that make it clear exactly what they
will produce: are those just username and hostname. Apart from that,
it seems like a good idea because it is more general and the functions
may turn out to have other uses you hadn't foreseen. Someone might for
example, select a From address based on the hostname using the match
function.
Okay, I think that I'm going to go with the primitives (actually, I did
that last night). As for the cheesiness of the names ... well, I went
with the flow of existing names. "username" is a bit ambiguous ... does
that mean "kenh" or "Ken Hornstein"? It's easy enough to change those
names if people can come up with something better. And it worked out
I didn't need to create any format instructions, which was a relief.
--Ken
_______________________________________________
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-workers(_at_)nongnu(_dot_)org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers