[Nmh-workers] Clearing `cur' Message.

Hi, How does one clear `cur' for a folder? It can be set with `folder 42' though the mandatory line of output is annoying. It can be listed and set with mark, e.g. `mark -seq cur -list', but not deleted; attempts do nothing. I wish to clear it in a script so a later habitual `rmm' will

Re: [Nmh-workers] Clearing `cur' Message.

Ralph wrote: How does one clear `cur' for a folder? It can be set with `folder 42' though the mandatory line of output is annoying. I just redirect the output to /dev/null. There is a folder -noprint, currently undocumented. All it does now is allow output of the folder stack while

Re: [Nmh-workers] Clearing `cur' Message.

I would have thought `mark -seq cur -del` would work, but it does not. That would seem to be the logical command to use? nor does `mark -seq cur -del cur` nor `mark -seq cur -del #` ___ Nmh-workers mailing list Nmh-workers@nongnu.org

Re: [Nmh-workers] Clearing `cur' Message.

Hi David, How does one clear `cur' for a folder? It can be set with `folder 42' though the mandatory line of output is annoying. I just redirect the output to /dev/null. Me too, in the expectation it contains just that one line. There is a folder -noprint, currently undocumented. All

[Nmh-workers] blind list expansion bug

Valdis wrote: However, actually digging into lib/aliases.tcl, we find that the line that does the parsing is actually: regexp {([^;:]+)([:;])(.*)} $line match key sep other I'm glad you posted that. I'm looking at fixing the bugs with blind lists not expanding correctly.

Re: [Nmh-workers] Clearing `cur' Message.

Ralph wrote: Hi David, There is a folder -noprint, currently undocumented. All it does now is allow output of the folder stack while suppressing other output. Maybe change it to suppress all output? I don't notice a difference. $ folder -noprint . inbox+ has 6312 messages

[Nmh-workers] relative message numbers?

i know ('man nmh') about 'cur:-3' and 'prev:3', which will pick the 3 previous messages (including cur, or not). is there a way to refer to _just_ the Nth message before or after cur? i often look at a scan listing and realize i want to see a message that's very close to 'cur' or 'last'. with

Re: [Nmh-workers] relative message numbers?

Paul wrote: i know ('man nmh') about 'cur:-3' and 'prev:3', which will pick the 3 previous messages (including cur, or not). is there a way to refer to _just_ the Nth message before or after cur? i often look at a scan listing and realize i want to see a message that's very close to 'cur'

Re: [Nmh-workers] relative message numbers?

I'd probably use it. Though I've been trying to rely more on pick and less on message numbers. You might vpick useful for certain use cases http://pthbb.org/manual/software/MH/vpick.html I find the following incantation especially useful: vpick -seq unseen -cull -new That only shows you

Re: [Nmh-workers] relative message numbers?

david wrote: Paul wrote: i know ('man nmh') about 'cur:-3' and 'prev:3', which will pick the 3 previous messages (including cur, or not). is there a way to refer to _just_ the Nth message before or after cur? i often look at a scan listing and realize i want to see a message

Re: [Nmh-workers] relative message numbers?

Paul wrote: i think not: cur-9 is a valid selection today. pick: bad message list cur-9 Apparently it is, but what is it supposed to do? David ___ Nmh-workers mailing list Nmh-workers@nongnu.org

Re: [Nmh-workers] relative message numbers?

Apparently it is, but what is it supposed to do? It's a bad list because your cur was 9. Try: pick 1; pick cur-9 ___ Nmh-workers mailing list Nmh-workers@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers

Re: [Nmh-workers] relative message numbers?

I don't really understand how relative numbers are useful, but if they are to be introduced why not use the same signifier as for folders? i.e; @ cur@2 = cur+2 cur@-4 = cur-4 This could also prevent some confusion as to why we are using something with a clear meaning (+) for such an odd

Re: [Nmh-workers] Clearing `cur' Message.

Hi David, Perhaps have mark work on it as it already partially does. `mark -seq cur -delete all'. How about this, Ralph? Instead of setting cur to 0, it ends up removing it from .mh_sequences. That's the same state as never having set cur. Sounds good. @@ -80,8 +80,14 @@ seq_delsel

Re: [Nmh-workers] relative message numbers?

ralph wrote: Hi Paul, jerrad wrote: I don't really understand how relative numbers are useful, but if they are to be introduced why not use the same signifier as for folders? i.e; @ cur@2 = cur+2 cur@-4 = cur-4 ... i'm also not sure how '@' relates to folders.

Re: [Nmh-workers] relative message numbers?

Hi Paul, folder +inbox refile @example last# Means +inbox/example. huh. i believe you, but you might have just found a bug in the man pages. :-) i can find no mention of such a feature. Me neither. Historically, $ g -B3 TSUBCWF docs/ChangeLog_MH-3_to_MH-6.6 Wed

Re: [Nmh-workers] Clearing `cur' Message.

Ralph wrote: Does the test need to be in the for-loop, running on every message? Perhaps if (!strcmp(cp, current) mp-curmsg = mp-lowsel mp-curmsg = mp-hghsel) { /* Removed current message indication, so reset curmsg. */ mp-curmsg = 0; } afterwards?

Re: [Nmh-workers] relative message numbers?

Perhaps Jerrad was referring to `@' being used instead of `+' for relative folders. folder +inbox refile @example last# Means +inbox/example. huh. i believe you, but you might have just found a bug in the man pages. :-) i can find no mention of such a feature.

Re: [Nmh-workers] relative message numbers?

folder +inbox refile @example last# Means +inbox/example. huh. i believe you, but you might have just found a bug in the man pages. :-) i can find no mention of such a feature. volunteers? I can try to tackle this tomorrow evening.