Timo Sirainen wrote:

> Also do you really have to return MODSEQ messageset for each SEARCH and
> SORT? You're just returning the search results twice. Why not add the MODSEQ
> into the untagged reply itself? ie. "* SEARCH 1 2 4 10 (MODSEQ 123)". Since
> client specifically asked for the MODSEQ, there's no compatibility issues.

Actually I like the idea.
I would rather change the syntax to "* SEARCH (MODSEQ 123) 1 2 4 10", so that you
can recognize new syntax earlier in parsing.

What do other people think?

Cheers,
Alexey
__________________________________________
R & D, ACI Worldwide/MessagingDirect
Watford, UK

Work Phone: +44 1923 81 2877
Home Page: http://orthanc.ab.ca/mel

I speak for myself only, not for my employer.
__________________________________________




Reply via email to