On 2015-09-15 09:56:56 +0200, Andreas Schäfer wrote: > On 13:33 Fri 11 Sep , Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > If something needs to be done, I'd rather see an improvement of > > the pattern system, where one can have pattern variables, and some > > functions to operate on these variables (this would include saving > > them and reloading them). Then you could use tag-pattern or any > > other function that works on patterns, possibly via a macro. > > That sounds like a good idea. Would you use these patterns to tag > messages automatically? Would the patterns be applied when new > messages arrive?
Only at the user request, like the current patterns. This could be done via a hook. But I don't think that tagging automatically would be a good idea. For some form of muting, there's <limit> that automatically applies to new messages too. Otherwise filtering on new mail should be implemented in Mutt (something that looks like a hook, but not like the usual hooks: I mean, when a new message matches some pattern, one should be able to automatically perform some action on it, like deleting, copying, moving or flagging it). -- Vincent Lefèvre <[email protected]> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
