Austin Clements writes:
>
> I'm used to reading this stuff, so either way is fine with me. Do we
> have bit set / clear / read macros?
>
I guess not. the things we have in query.cc are related but different.
>> > + else if (*i == "Tghost")
>> > + message->flags |= (1 << NOTMUCH_MESSAGE_F
Austin Clements writes:
> Quoth David Bremner on Oct 05 at 9:45 am:
>> Austin Clements writes:
>> > +void *local = talloc_new (NULL);
>>
>> What's the advantage of using a local talloc context here? Is this just
>> an optimization?
>
> There are a few allocations that wind up going in to t
Austin Clements writes:
> Quoth David Bremner on Oct 05 at 10:56 am:
>> Austin Clements writes:
>> > +if (new_features & NOTMUCH_FEATURE_GHOSTS) {
>> > + t_end = db->metadata_keys_end ("thread_id_");
>> > + for (t = db->metadata_keys_begin ("thread_id_"); t != t_end; ++t)
>> > + ++tot
The code here is an extended version of a patch from Jani Nikula.
---
completion/notmuch-completion.bash | 6 ++-
completion/notmuch-completion.zsh | 3 +-
doc/man1/notmuch-search.rst| 32
notmuch-search.c | 101 ++---
te
From: Jani Nikula
This allows having multiple --foo=bar --foo=baz options on the command
line, with the corresponding values OR'd together.
[Test added by Michal Sojka]
---
command-line-arguments.c | 6 +-
command-line-arguments.h | 1 +
test/T410-argument-parsing.sh | 3 ++-
test
The new outputs allow printing senders, recipients or both of matching
messages.
This code based on a patch from Jani Nikula.
---
completion/notmuch-completion.bash | 2 +-
completion/notmuch-completion.zsh | 3 +-
doc/man1/notmuch-search.rst| 22 +++-
notmuch-search.c
Many functions that implement the search command need to access command
line options. Instead of passing each option in a separate variable, put
them in a structure and pass only this structure.
This will become handy in the following patches.
---
notmuch-search.c | 122 ++
Hi,
this is a second version of my adaptation of Jani's patch series
adding --output=addresses and similar arguments to notmuch search.
Based on the feedback from others, this version uses Jani's original
"keyword flags" implementation with --flag=a --flab=b syntax. Also the
tests for --output an
Quoth David Bremner on Oct 05 at 10:56 am:
> Austin Clements writes:
> > +if (new_features & NOTMUCH_FEATURE_GHOSTS) {
> > + t_end = db->metadata_keys_end ("thread_id_");
> > + for (t = db->metadata_keys_begin ("thread_id_"); t != t_end; ++t)
> > + ++total;
> > +}
>
> It would b
Quoth David Bremner on Oct 05 at 10:30 am:
> Austin Clements writes:
>
> > + message->flags &= ~(1 << NOTMUCH_MESSAGE_FLAG_GHOST);
>
> What do you think about using bit set / clear / read macros? I don't
> insist, but I wonder if it would make this part more readable.
I'm used to reading
Quoth David Bremner on Oct 05 at 9:45 am:
> Austin Clements writes:
> > +void *local = talloc_new (NULL);
>
> What's the advantage of using a local talloc context here? Is this just
> an optimization?
There are a few allocations that wind up going in to this local
context because of the cal
Quoth David Bremner on Oct 05 at 10:56 am:
> Austin Clements writes:
> > +if (new_features & NOTMUCH_FEATURE_GHOSTS) {
> > + t_end = db->metadata_keys_end ("thread_id_");
> > + for (t = db->metadata_keys_begin ("thread_id_"); t != t_end; ++t)
> > + ++total;
> > +}
>
> It would b
Quoth David Bremner on Oct 05 at 10:30 am:
> Austin Clements writes:
>
> > + message->flags &= ~(1 << NOTMUCH_MESSAGE_FLAG_GHOST);
>
> What do you think about using bit set / clear / read macros? I don't
> insist, but I wonder if it would make this part more readable.
I'm used to reading
Quoth David Bremner on Oct 05 at 9:45 am:
> Austin Clements writes:
> > +void *local = talloc_new (NULL);
>
> What's the advantage of using a local talloc context here? Is this just
> an optimization?
There are a few allocations that wind up going in to this local
context because of the cal
On Wed, Oct 01 2014, Sergei Shilovsky wrote:
> ---
> doc/man1/notmuch-config.rst | 18 ++
> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/doc/man1/notmuch-config.rst b/doc/man1/notmuch-config.rst
> index 3c9a568..9de5534 100644
> --- a/doc/man1/notmuch-config.rst
> +++ b/doc/ma
The new outputs allow printing senders, recipients or both of matching
messages.
This code based on a patch from Jani Nikula.
---
completion/notmuch-completion.bash | 2 +-
completion/notmuch-completion.zsh | 3 +-
doc/man1/notmuch-search.rst| 22 +++-
notmuch-search.c
Many functions that implement the search command need to access command
line options. Instead of passing each option in a separate variable, put
them in a structure and pass only this structure.
This will become handy in the following patches.
---
notmuch-search.c | 122 ++
From: Jani Nikula
This allows having multiple --foo=bar --foo=baz options on the command
line, with the corresponding values OR'd together.
[Test added by Michal Sojka]
---
command-line-arguments.c | 6 +-
command-line-arguments.h | 1 +
test/T410-argument-parsing.sh | 3 ++-
test
Hi,
this is a second version of my adaptation of Jani's patch series
adding --output=addresses and similar arguments to notmuch search.
Based on the feedback from others, this version uses Jani's original
"keyword flags" implementation with --flag=a --flab=b syntax. Also the
tests for --output an
The code here is an extended version of a patch from Jani Nikula.
---
completion/notmuch-completion.bash | 6 ++-
completion/notmuch-completion.zsh | 3 +-
doc/man1/notmuch-search.rst| 32
notmuch-search.c | 101 ++---
te
Tomi Ollila writes:
> On Sun, Oct 05 2014, David Bremner wrote:
>
>> It blows things up by a factor of six or so, so it's worth giving
>> people a heads up. It won't effect e.g. Debian, that already builds
>> with -g and then strips.
>
> Maybe SomeOne(?) could make a patch that strip(1)s at make
Austin Clements writes:
> This series modifies our database representation of messages that have
> been referenced by other messages, but for which we don't have the
> message itself. Currently, we store this information as Xapian
> metadata, but this has several downsides for performance and
>
Austin Clements writes:
> +if (new_features & NOTMUCH_FEATURE_GHOSTS) {
> + t_end = db->metadata_keys_end ("thread_id_");
> + for (t = db->metadata_keys_begin ("thread_id_"); t != t_end; ++t)
> + ++total;
> +}
It would be nice to have the comment below, or something like i
Austin Clements writes:
> + message->flags &= ~(1 << NOTMUCH_MESSAGE_FLAG_GHOST);
What do you think about using bit set / clear / read macros? I don't
insist, but I wonder if it would make this part more readable.
> + else if (*i == "Tghost")
> + message->flags |= (1 << NOT
On Sun, Oct 05 2014, David Bremner wrote:
> It blows things up by a factor of six or so, so it's worth giving
> people a heads up. It won't effect e.g. Debian, that already builds
> with -g and then strips.
Maybe SomeOne(?) could make a patch that strip(1)s at make install time ?
Tomi
> ---
>
Austin Clements writes:
> +void *local = talloc_new (NULL);
What's the advantage of using a local talloc context here? Is this just
an optimization?
d
This is mostly culled from the commit message for 7f2cb3be (nmbug:
Translate to Python, 2014-10-03). I realized while writing it that
the 7f2cb3be commit message has:
* 'nmbug log' now execs 'git log', as there's no need to keep the
Python process around once we've launched Git there.
But
This is mostly culled from the commit message for 7f2cb3be (nmbug:
Translate to Python, 2014-10-03). I realized while writing it that
the 7f2cb3be commit message has:
* 'nmbug log' now execs 'git log', as there's no need to keep the
Python process around once we've launched Git there.
But
It blows things up by a factor of six or so, so it's worth giving
people a heads up. It won't effect e.g. Debian, that already builds
with -g and then strips.
---
NEWS | 7 +++
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
diff --git a/NEWS b/NEWS
index fa57e5d..eb769fd 100644
--- a/NEWS
+++ b/NEWS
@@ -42,
Austin Clements writes:
> Previously, this was implemented using a horrible GDB script (because
> there is no such thing as a non-horrible GDB script). This GDB script
> often broke with newer versions of GDB for mysterious reasons. Port
> the test script to GDB's Python API, which makes the co
Tomi Ollila writes:
> On Fri, Oct 03 2014, David Bremner wrote:
>
>> In the future, tests may rely on debug symbols being present in
>> notmuch, so we plan to switch the default flags.
>>
>> The main purpose of this test is to help explain the perhaps
>> mysterious failures of other tests which
Jani Nikula writes:
> Found by clang:
>
pushed
d
"W. Trevor King" writes:
> This allows us to capture stdout and stderr separately, and do other
> explicit subprocess manipulation without resorting to external
> packages. It should be compatible with Python 2.7 and later
> (including the 3.x series).
>
Pushed patch 1/2 to master. This probabl
On Wed, Oct 01 2014, Sergei Shilovsky wrote:
> ---
> doc/man1/notmuch-config.rst | 18 ++
> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/doc/man1/notmuch-config.rst b/doc/man1/notmuch-config.rst
> index 3c9a568..9de5534 100644
> --- a/doc/man1/notmuch-config.rst
> +++ b/doc/ma
Tomi Ollila writes:
> On Sun, Oct 05 2014, David Bremner wrote:
>
>> It blows things up by a factor of six or so, so it's worth giving
>> people a heads up. It won't effect e.g. Debian, that already builds
>> with -g and then strips.
>
> Maybe SomeOne(™) could make a patch that strip(1)s at make
Austin Clements writes:
> This series modifies our database representation of messages that have
> been referenced by other messages, but for which we don't have the
> message itself. Currently, we store this information as Xapian
> metadata, but this has several downsides for performance and
>
Austin Clements writes:
> +if (new_features & NOTMUCH_FEATURE_GHOSTS) {
> + t_end = db->metadata_keys_end ("thread_id_");
> + for (t = db->metadata_keys_begin ("thread_id_"); t != t_end; ++t)
> + ++total;
> +}
It would be nice to have the comment below, or something like i
Austin Clements writes:
> + message->flags &= ~(1 << NOTMUCH_MESSAGE_FLAG_GHOST);
What do you think about using bit set / clear / read macros? I don't
insist, but I wonder if it would make this part more readable.
> + else if (*i == "Tghost")
> + message->flags |= (1 << NOT
Austin Clements writes:
> +void *local = talloc_new (NULL);
What's the advantage of using a local talloc context here? Is this just
an optimization?
d
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
On Sun, Oct 05 2014, David Bremner wrote:
> It blows things up by a factor of six or so, so it's worth giving
> people a heads up. It won't effect e.g. Debian, that already builds
> with -g and then strips.
Maybe SomeOne(™) could make a patch that strip(1)s at make install time ?
Tomi
> ---
>
40 matches
Mail list logo
