kre wrote:
Actually, subtle it is not - it is quite blatant, and is explicit in the
post man page.
It has subtle effects. This went undetected in the mh-profile(5) man page
until late 2011:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/nmh-workers/2011-12/msg00088.html
I (quickly) counted that this (post doesn't read the profile) has come up
on nmh-workers twice a year, on average, since 2011.
If we are to add warnings, why stop at post? Why not warn about other
entries in the profile that aren't used?
Because we're not sliding down that slope. This is a specific issue
that can be easily addressed.
I have an entry for "post" in my profile (have done for a long time).
I don't expect it to be used, but it allows me to do
mhparam post
to see what default options get used (the actual entries are also in
the profile entry for send).
I prefer to view the actual entries. And not have to keep two sets
in sync.
of making the profile parser bigger and even messier
(and also forcing a full read every time, which one day might
be good to avoid - just reading enoughto get the entry needed)
I cannot imagine that profile parser size is a real concern, or that
the difference between a full and partial read is measurable on
modern platforms.
David
--
nmh-workers
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers