On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 11:52:09 -0800, Jameson Graef Rollins <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 19:25:19 +0000, David Edmondson <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 10:46:57 -0800, Jameson Graef Rollins > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Is there a reason it's really necessary to make this change? Can't > > > callers just ignore the returned button if they don't care about it > > > further? I can see that maybe it's nice to be able to specify > > > parameters at creation time, but I'm not sure why that requires throwing > > > out the returned object as well. > > > > Patches 2 and 3 in that series can result in the button not being > > inserted. > > Can patches 2 and 3 be rewritten so they are compatible with the button > being returned by the button creation function?
No. The whole purpose of 2 and 3 is that they don't insert a button in some circumstances. If no button is inserted then there is no button to return. The changes to `notmuch-show-insert-part-multipart/signed' and `notmuch-show-insert-part-multipart/encrypted' in patch 1 could be re-written to anticipate that a button might not be returned, but the resulting code was more complex that that I sent. > > > I can see that maybe it's nice to be able to specify parameters at > > > creation time, but I'm not sure why that requires throwing out the > > > returned object as well. Do you have a specific use case for this?
pgpnrGnL8cor7.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ notmuch mailing list [email protected] http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
