------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugs.exim.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1062 --- Comment #6 from Andrey N. Oktyabrski <[email protected]> 2011-01-13 12:33:06 --- (In reply to comment #4) > (In reply to comment #2) > > What you think about the configuration option "acl_recursion_depth" with > > hardcoded maximum value 200 and default 20? I can made this patch if it > > pointful. > > That was suggested as an alternative in the original discussion of this idea, > but a patch was not forthcoming. > > In my opinion this is potentially a good solution *as long as* no other > maintainers object. When I can start to write the new patch? How I would know about "no other maintainers object"? Will you let me know about it? > If implemented we should document it in the spec but _not_ include it in any > way in the default configuration file. There are already many ways new users > can shoot themselves below the kneew, we should not be encouraging them to put > the barrel against their temple :) Exactly so! I agree with it. > > Not all things can be made by the ${reduce ...} > > How can I iterate through, for example, ${lookup dnsdb ...} result? Or > > $recipients list? > > I would not use recursion if something same as "while" cycle exists. But in > > exim configuration I have not any cycle operator. > > Those operators would be: > > forall{<a list>}{<a condition>} > forany{<a list>}{<a condition>} > > http://www.exim.org/exim-html-current/doc/html/spec_html/ch11.html I know about these operators. But I can not to repeat the "block". If I need to do more then one operation in turn, I must use ACL recursion now. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.exim.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email -- ## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-dev Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ##
