On Sun, 22 Nov 2015 23:16:04 +0100, Roland Winkler wrote: > > > Side note: While implementing the support I noticed that the macro > > 'bbdb-mua-wrapper' seems to be one important part that prevents > > one from adding support for additional muas w/o patching bbdb > > itself. You could rewrite the macro to simply use a dispatch table > > to select an appropriate function to select buffer based on mua: > [snip] > > With this modified macro in place I was able to use BBDB with > > Wanderlust only be modifying variables and advicing defuns [1] > > since 2014. > > Just to make sure I understand correctly: your proposed change to > the macro bbdb-mua-wrapper does not solve all problems immediately. > It also requires advicing defuns if one wants to add a new MUA. > -- My point is that advicing defuns can make debugging very painful. > So for issues of general interest I really would not want to > advertise it as a strategy.
I agree: Advicing functions is definitely not a good general mechanism to provide extensibility. One way to provide a better way to extend bbdb-mua could be something along this lines: - consistently use a lookup-table for all mua-specific stuff (functions, hooks, ...) - provide a function that mua-support-modules call in order to register themselves The role of bbdb-mua-* would be to read the lookup-table and dispatch to mua-specific functions if neccessary. Is this a direction bbdb-mua could evolve? Best, -- David ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ bbdb-info@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
