On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 11:00:15PM -0600, Mark J. Roberts wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Jan 2001, Travis Bemann wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 10:31:27PM -0600, Mark J. Roberts wrote:
> > > On Wed, 3 Jan 2001, Brandon wrote:
> > >
> > > > > It gets worse. Date: is not always the first header. Ian's mail client
> > > > > puts Date: AFTER the Subject: header. I guess that means I can't assume
> > > > > any order at all. Ah well, it just means I'll have to check if every line
> > > > > starts with every header. Yuck.
> > > >
> > > > Why do you care what order the mail headers come in? A mail message just
> > > > has a bunch of headers followed by a blank line.
> > >
> > > I stupidly thought there was a consistent order to them. A couple days ago
> > > I cribbed a mail parser from some kid's school project. It made the same
> > > stupid assumption. (I guess I got what I deserved for assuming that other
> > > people's code is valid.)
> >
> > That kid must have not had a clue what he or she was doing. It's
> > pretty fucking obvious that mail header order is supposed to be
> > freeform.
>
> I wrote one in under an hour that was one-fifth the size. He used a
> StringTokenizer for no good reason. On the whole spool.
On the whole *spool*?!?! That's gotta have massive performance
problems on boxen such as mine where all mail is kept in the spool
file and is not regularly deleted. My spool is massive. It contains
about 15600 messages.
--
Travis Bemann
Sendmail is still screwed up on my box.
My email address is really [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PGP signature
