On 11:39, Tue 05 Jan 10, Carl Worth wrote:
> Right. So example code using this would be:
>
> for (notmuch_messages_to_first (messages);
> notmuch_messages_has_current (messages);
> notmuch_messages_to_next (messages))
> {
> notmuch_message_t *message;
>
> message = notmuch_messages_get_current (messages);
>
> ...
> }
>
> And for iterating in the opposite direction it's very similar:
>
> for (notmuch_messages_to_last (messages);
> notmuch_messages_has_current (messages);
> notmuch_messages_to_previous (messages))
> {
> notmuch_message_t *message;
>
> message = notmuch_messages_get_current (messages);
>
> ...
> }
>
> Note that if you couldn't get the iterator to point to an invalid item
> before the first, then this second loop would have to look very
> different.Yes, make sense like that. I'm not sure what to do about the iterator when is on an invalid item, if you reach an invalid item doing to_next should be possible to do to_previous to recover the last valid item? Or is better to force the user to use to_last to go back? In some cases implement to_previous will need to store the previous item (actually I did that on the patches I sent). -- Rubén Pollán | jabber:[email protected] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Ésta es la historia de una sociedad que se hunde y mientras cae se repite: hasta ahora todo va bien, hasta ahora todo va bien ... Pero lo importante no es la caida sino el aterrizaje. el odio
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ notmuch mailing list [email protected] http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
