On Jun 26, 2004, at 7:47 PM, David W. Tamkin wrote:
[two samples of a single current syntax, which interestingly was
a recipe with no conditions]
You don't recognize the example instantly?
Curious....
Using unescaped braces to specify the number or range of repetitions
conflicts with existing rcfiles where a brace in a regexp means a
literal brace character.
:0 as an "Old School" flag deals with that.
Currently rcfiles may have blank lines anywhere that look good to the
writer, and in recent versions blank lines may even interrupt recipes.
The proposal is that if the line after a blank line is neither a
variable assignment nor another blank line, it is the first condition
of a new recipe.
Yeah.
Still, not IMHO, a deal-breaker.
The suggested use of a colon to start a condition,
I'm thinking of using a ":" to allow the specification of flags for the
current match.
"/" would start a condition.
even if it had some way to recognize current-syntax flag lines, would
break old pre-asterisk rcfiles where a regexp condition begins with a
literal colon to match a colon.
Time to upgrade.
... I don't understand how this new mail thrower will know which line
is the action and not another condition.
By the first non-blank character.
... under the proposal, it would be an additional action, saving a
copy of the message to a folder by that name.
No, it wouldn't.
Perhaps you missed the references to "+" and ">" in non-"Old School"
mode.
Aloha mai Nai`a!
--
"Please have your Internet License http://kapu.net/~mjwise/
and Usenet Registration handy..."
____________________________________________________________
procmail mailing list Procmail homepage: http://www.procmail.org/
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail