Cengiz Alaettinoglu wrote:
>
> Thank you. I assume I would be safe (i.e. would not corrupt my
> database) if I avoid updating the name and the net fields. Is this
> right?
Yes, but if you use anything more primitive than I mentioned, then you have to
worry about keeping the in-memory data struct
Jamie Zawinski ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) on October 4:
> Use bbdb-search-simple to see if the record is there; use bbdb-record-putprop
> to change the non-builtin slots. Other than that, all you've got to work with
> is bbdb-record-edit-field-internal. But if you're down at that level, you'd
> better
Cengiz Alaettinoglu wrote:
>
> It does not update the record if the record is in the database,
> instead it signals an error.
Use bbdb-search-simple to see if the record is there; use bbdb-record-putprop
to change the non-builtin slots. Other than that, all you've got to work with
is bbdb-recor
Jamie Zawinski ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) on October 4:
> Cengiz Alaettinoglu wrote:
> >
> > P.S. IMHO, I think bbdb is missing a lisp function when passed an
> > alist like ((name . "Foo") (net . "foo@bar") ...) would create/update
> > the corresponding bbdb record.
>
> That's what bbdb-create-intern
Cengiz Alaettinoglu wrote:
>
> P.S. IMHO, I think bbdb is missing a lisp function when passed an
> alist like ((name . "Foo") (net . "foo@bar") ...) would create/update
> the corresponding bbdb record.
That's what bbdb-create-internal is for.
