On Sat, 2007-06-09 at 13:00 +0300, Philip Van Hoof wrote: > What I disliked most about Camel's 'imap' code, though, is the fact that > the sequences have to correspond to the array indexes of the > CamelFolderSummary. It sounds like it would have been more easy if that > was a key in a hashtable.
...??? are you serious? > > For example if a message got expunged that had a sequence value in the > beginning of the folder, it right now more or less means that the entire > folder has to be re-synchronised. While the majority of the local data > can be perfectly corrected in stead too. huh? it doesn't re-fetch anything, it simply removes the item from the array at the index given in the untagged EXPUNGE notification. server says: * 1 EXPUNGE camel-imap-summary does: g_ptr_array_remove_index (messages, seqid - 1); (seqid in this case would be '1', but keep in mind that IMAP seqids start at 1 while in c, array indexes start at 0) How would a hash table simplify this? It'd only serve to complicate things because you'd have to re-key the entire hash table after each EXPUNGE notification. Not to mention it would consume a fair bit more memory... Jeff _______________________________________________ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolutionfirstname.lastname@example.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers