On 2009-11-02, Noah Sheppard <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 02, 2009 at 01:46:12PM -0800, Gary Johnson wrote:
> > Further, if you're going to be picky about the subject, it should > > really reflect the subject of the message, not be just some generic > > equivalent of "you forgot the subject". It hardly seems worth making > > this configurable. > By that logic, why do we have the "Re: your mail" hard-coded default at > all? Because at that point in the code, mutt has to do something about creating a subject for a reply to a message without a subject. Testing for and providing a reasonable solution for that rare case took two lines of code. The subject could have been simply "Re: ", but the author decided to make it a little nicer with "Re: your mail", a difference of nine characters in a string. Doing any more than that to address the very narrow case of "I don't want to bother changing the reply but I don't like the default", just seems to me like overkill. Of course, I can probably count on one hand the number of replies I've sent to messages without subjects. Regards, Gary
