A while back, there was a discussion about
relative message numbers. For example,
http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/nmh-workers/2012-10/msg00048.html.
But I don't believe there was a resolution. Was there?
If foobar is a message sequence then something like forbar+3, for the
third message of foobar, would make my life a bit easier.
I think Paul Fox accurately summed up the consensus view on that
thread:
but i admit: i've thought about this quite a bit in the past, and
have never come up with syntax that was backward compatible,
meaningful, and enough faster to type than the digits themselves to be
useful.
I don't think the situation has changed. Right now anything with a
"-" in it counts as a range, so there's that to think about.
Even better, would be to allow forbar+3,4 and foobar forbar+3-5. Then,
recursively, and perhaps a bit fancifully, since forbar+3-5 is a
message sequence, forbar+3-5+2 would be meaningful. If foobar has had a
least four messages it would denote the fourth messages of foobar.
I have to ask: is that easier? I mean, really? Robert has given a
reasonable alternative.
--Ken
_______________________________________________
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-workers(_at_)nongnu(_dot_)org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers