Hello.
I used the email
address 'Name<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>' as my
pop account.
When I sent the mail using the adress, it was added to autocollect.adb automatically.
But my pop server was changed later, and I used 'Name<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>'.
And then, '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' is added to autocollect.adb as additional email of previous entry.
Then, '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' was expanded to 'Name<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>' which is invalid now.
When I sent the mail using the adress, it was added to autocollect.adb automatically.
But my pop server was changed later, and I used 'Name<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>'.
And then, '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' is added to autocollect.adb as additional email of previous entry.
Then, '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' was expanded to 'Name<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>' which is invalid now.
I thought it is
desirable to hold the e-mail which user entered in the case that expansion was
done by e-mail address.
And, I found the
reason of the behavior in the AdbManager.cpp and AdbEntry.cpp.
In AdbManager.cpp, AdbExpand(...) called AdbLookupForEntriesOrGroups() to
get the list of address matched with string which user entered.
From the two kind of returned list, We can only tell the entries matched with nickname and the entries matched with other fields.
That means we cannot tell the returned entry was matched with default e-mail or additional e-mails.
Actually, the function AdbEntryStoredInMemory::Matches(...) treated the two case as same.
From the two kind of returned list, We can only tell the entries matched with nickname and the entries matched with other fields.
That means we cannot tell the returned entry was matched with default e-mail or additional e-mails.
Actually, the function AdbEntryStoredInMemory::Matches(...) treated the two case as same.
I thought AdbEntry class must has some room for matching result(such as
index of additional e-mail) to enable GetDescription() to use the result.
What do you guys think about?
-Jeongkyu Kim
