Felipe Contreras <felipe.contre...@gmail.com> writes:

>> Is this assuming that the sort order in the CLI is the same as in the
>> library / bindings? that seems a bit fragile if so.
> Both the CLI and the bindings are using the same libnotmuch library.
> If neither of them specify a sort order, the default sort order of
> libnotmuch would be used (I presume). Exactly the same order I would
> get if I write a C program that uses libnotmuch and doesn't specify
> any order.
> Why would the CLI specify an order the user didn't specify to libnotmuch?

I guess the point is that the CLI is not required to track the library
precisely, so even if it is a bit theoretical, this change does
introduce some fragility / technical debt into the test suite.

For better or for worse, the API does not document a default sort order,
so assuming any particular sort order is probably a mistake. I can
imagine a future database backend where the "UNSORTED" order is actually
non-deterministic. If we were to document a default sort order, UNSORTED
might make the most sense as a default, as it's the highest performance
(more or less by definition).
notmuch mailing list -- notmuch@notmuchmail.org
To unsubscribe send an email to notmuch-le...@notmuchmail.org

Reply via email to