Why not just search the list of defined rules to create the list,
and have something like:
meta SOMERULE (__SOMERULE_* > 5)
that way newly-added rules are included in the group "for free".
we used to have this in core, but nobody used it so we removed it; if you
open an enhancement request in bugzilla we can reconsider it.
--j.
Karl Chen writes:
> I see a lot of rules of the form:
>
> body __FOO_1 /phrase one/
> body __FOO_2 /phrase two/
> body __FOO_3 /phrase three/
> ...
>
> meta FOO_MULTI_2 ((__FOO_1 + __FOO_2 + __FOO_3 + ...) >= 2)
> meta FOO_MULTI_3 ((__FOO_1 + __FOO_2 + __FOO_3 + ...) >= 3)
> meta FOO_MULTI_4 ((__FOO_1 + __FOO_2 + __FOO_3 + ...) >= 4)
> ...
>
> score FOO_MULTI_2 0.5
> score FOO_MULTI_3 0.4 # additional to previous
> score FOO_MULTI_4 0.3 # additional to previous
> ...
>
> The meta rules are long, repetitive, brittle, annoying to update.
> Another problem is when you want to add to someone else's rule
> group. For example, let's say I want to add to the ADVANCE_FEE_#
> group. The only way would be to modify the 20_advance_fee.cf
> file, rather than user/local preferences.
>
> I propose something like this:
>
> body __FOO_1 /phrase one/
> group __FOO_1 FOO
>
> body __FOO_2 /phrase two/
> group __FOO_2 FOO
>
> body __FOO_3 /phrase three/
> group __FOO_3 FOO
>
> Or:
>
> body __FOO_1 /phrase one/
> body __FOO_2 /phrase two/
> body __FOO_3 /phrase three/
>
> group FOO __FOO_1 __FOO_2
> group FOO __FOO_3
>
> A numeric "variable" like "meta FOO (__FOO_1 + __FOO_2 + ...)"
> could alleviate the redundancy problem, but the key advantage of
> the "group" proposal is that new rules can be added to the group
> later. The score rule could look like:
>
> multiscore FOO 0.0 0.5 0.9 1.2 ...
>
> or:
>
> multiscore FOO >= 2 0.5
> multiscore FOO >= 3 0.9
> multiscore FOO >= 4 1.2
>
> --
> Karl 2006-12-21 22:24
