kre wrote: > Actually, subtle it is not - it is quite blatant, and is explicit in the > post man page.
It has subtle effects. This went undetected in the mh-profile(5) man page until late 2011: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/nmh-workers/2011-12/msg00088.html I (quickly) counted that this (post doesn't read the profile) has come up on nmh-workers twice a year, on average, since 2011. > If we are to add warnings, why stop at post? Why not warn about other > entries in the profile that aren't used? Because we're not sliding down that slope. This is a specific issue that can be easily addressed. > I have an entry for "post" in my profile (have done for a long time). > I don't expect it to be used, but it allows me to do > mhparam post > to see what default options get used (the actual entries are also in > the profile entry for send). I prefer to view the actual entries. And not have to keep two sets in sync. > of making the profile parser bigger and even messier > (and also forcing a full read every time, which one day might > be good to avoid - just reading enoughto get the entry needed) I cannot imagine that profile parser size is a real concern, or that the difference between a full and partial read is measurable on modern platforms. David -- nmh-workers https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers