Quoth Louis Rilling on Jul 12 at 12:38 am:
> On 11/07/11 16:07 -0400, Austin Clements wrote:
> > I worry that this may compound the confusion caused by mutt's handling
> > of the new flag, but I suppose people aren't likely to manipulate any
> > of the other maildir-synchronized flags without also marking the
> > message as seen.
> 
> Even if they don't mark the message as seen, any flag changed would
> move the message to cur/. The only buggy behavior would be from
> mutt, with the bug you mentioned about mutt putting messages with
> flags back to new/.

Yes.  I was thinking of someone tagging a message as, say, flagged,
while it's still tagged unread.  Then it would change from new to old
in mutt.  OTOH, adding some other non-synchronized tag wouldn't change
it from new to old.  I don't think there is a "correct" solution; your
approach is probably the best compromise.

> > The convention in notmuch is to use notmuch_bool_t, TRUE, and FALSE
> > (though, admittedly, I don't know why; avoiding C99-isms?)
> 
> And bool is already used at another place in message.cc:
> 
>       struct maildir_flag_tag {
>           char flag;
>           const char *tag;
>           bool inverse;
>       };
> 
> IIUC it should be changed to notmuch_bool_t too.

Yes, I suppose it should (something slipped by cworth's eagle-eyed
reviews!).  Though that appears to be the sole use of bool in all of
libnotmuch.
_______________________________________________
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch

Reply via email to