> I do agree that mp->hghmsg++ is simpler than the whole chunk of code > (which I copied from folder_addmsg). I do think that mp->lowmsg > should be set to 1 if it was zero, though (since there is no message > number 0). Here's why:
Both calls to folder_realloc() in inc.c use 'mp->lowoff', not 'mp->lowmsg' for the second argument 'int lo'. In 'folder_read()', this value will be at least 1, so the particular code you mention won't fail. In principle, I agree wholeheartedly about rigorous maintenance of state variables. The whole business of dealing with the variables in 'struct msgs' would be better handled with a C++ class, or just subroutines that are called when members need to be changed. However, the nmh code set is a bit of jumble, and I really worry about unintended side effects of a change that on the surface makes perfect sense. So at this point I'd want to study the handling of 'mp->lowmsg' before making the change. _______________________________________________ Nmh-workers mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
