On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 04:20:28PM +0100, Daniel Kollar wrote:
> But with your regexp you cannot determine the head of the thread (w/o
> the Re:) like the first line of your example
>
> [ruby-talk:7097] Rubyize this method
>
> You need to add a "?" after the (re...) pattern.
>
> The regexp which finally works for me is now
>
> set reply_regexp=
> '^(\[[a-z0-9:-]+\][ \t]*)?((re([\\[0-9\\]+])*|aw):[ \t]*)?+[ \t]*'
That's interesting, because the one I posted works fine for me, and
the default mutt reply_regexp doesn't do what you suggest:
Default: "^(re([\[0-9\]+])*|aw):[ \t]*"
I assumed the reply regexp was applied to the subject, and the matched
text is removed, then the resultant string is compared with other
subjects. If this is true (is it not?), then you shouldn't have to
conditionalize the re portion of the subject.
--
Josh Huber | [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
1024D/6B21489A 61F0 6138 BE7B FEBF A223 E9D1 BFE1 2065 6B21 489A
PGP signature
