On Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:56:16 -0500, Aaron Ecay <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:48:42 -0500, Austin Clements <[email protected]> wrote: > > Did you consider using point-max instead of mark? IIRC, that mark was > > very recently introduced which, perhaps irrationally, makes it seem > > less future-proof to me. > > Well, if the patch goes in and someone changes the code so that it no > longer sets the mark (in the same way), they will be the one breaking > stuff, and they’ll have to come up with the fix themself. [...]
True that. > [...] Using point-max > would include the signature in the quoting as well. It would probably be > fairly odd to want to put an MML tag in one’s signature, but that doesn’t > mean that we should break that usage. > So, would I be right to assume MML tags in signatures are never evaluated to begin with? Otherwise, there would still be a security hole, no? > > > > > > > > (defun notmuch-mua-forward-message () > > > (message-forward) > > > > Speaking of future-proofing, it would be good to have a test. > > It would. ;) I’ll work on one. > Thanks! These might save you some time: id:"[email protected]" > -- > Aaron Ecay > _______________________________________________ > notmuch mailing list > [email protected] > http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch Peace -- Pieter _______________________________________________ notmuch mailing list [email protected] http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
