Hello Peter,
On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 16:33:49 +0200 GMT (06/09/2004, 21:33 +0700 GMT),
Peter Palmreuther wrote:
PP But we're not about to vote for water flowing upstream, but if we
PP redirect the river on the left or on the right side of your planned
PP building. Some people say it's always been
Hello 9Val,
I apologise for my late reply.
M This is why I would say that *only_one_move_action* should be allowed in
M a filter.
It is closer to truth :) and sounds like suggestion, well, will be
done
Great!
M I have actually replied to that I think. There should only be one move
M
Hello 9Val,
The answer to both questions is quite simple. Remember old filters. If
you had a filter with destination folder and with 'mark parked'
checked you never had care about when TB! will actually park the
message. It is more natural way - order shouldn't be critical if
Hello Peter,
M Naaah! What for? It's easier to understand the way it works now.
LOL... a little while after I sent it I read your phrase 'Enough of this
NFS stuff for a few days I think. :) '
Nawww, more Miguel/V3006 msgs up ahead ... hehe
What can I say... ;-)
--
Best regards,
Miguel
* Alexander Leschinsky writes:
Hello MAU,
This is why I would say that *only_one_move_action* should be allowed in
a filter. I don't see any need for allowing more, the copy action is
there
Agreed.
Well, I can see... Let's explain in pseudo-code (and let's don't speak,
that some checks of
On Sunday, September 5, 2004, at 12:11:49 PM, the old mahogany desk
trembled gently as MAU began rapidly hitting his squeaky typewriter's
keys:
That is exactly my point. To be consistent with what 'move' (which can
be considered equivalent to cutpaste) generally means, I think and
believe that
Hello MAU,
Much the contrary, it _broadens_ the possibilities of what can be done
with a filter.
And I for forgot to add...
Without the need of having to concatenate two or more filters (or one
filter and several sub-filters), to establish the order of execution of
some actions.
--
Best
Hello MAU,
Start filter execution
Get message from Source folder into _Working area_
Manipulate message _in_ working area
...
Copy working area to some folder A
More manipulation allowed
...
Move working area to destination folder B
...
Marcus Ohlström, [MO] wrote:
IF subject contains blah {
MOVE TO \junk
MARK AS read
}
If we are talking about Incoming filters, which I think we are assuming
most of the time, your above filter would end up with the message marked
as read in the Inbox but not in Junk.
Hmm.. You
Michael Geyer, [MG] wrote:
What are several MOVEs in a row supposed to do: move _one_ and only
one message, or create several copies of the original message?
Moving the message more than once should move that single message
twice. Why one would wish to do this is beyond me, but if he wishes to
Hello Boris,
The big question is: If the actions in a filter are, and should be,
executed in the order they are listed.
Answer is: Yes, the should be executed in the order they are listed.
snipped
Thanks for replying :)
No problem. You are a great beta-tester, so why not reply?
Because I
Hello MaXxX,
Personally, I'd think sub-filters should be made as actions,
themselves. Then the order would REALLY matter where applicable, and
wouldn't matter at all where not applicable. With filters looking
like:
(filter) IF subject contains blah THEN
(action) PARK MESSAGE
Hello Marcus,
My previous reply mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] was
incomplete. I intended to complete it after lunch but I moved it to
Outbox before parking it... ;-)
Sorry, I don't have the time now and, as I have already said in some
other messages, I'm facing a quite busy week.
--
Best regards,
Hello MaXxX,
Here's the fault in your reasoning.
The program is:
Fill your cup with coffee
Now put it in the cupboard
Now put 2 spoons of sugar in your cup
Now stir it
We have a cup of sweet coffee in the cupboard.
Change your program to:
Fill your cup with coffee
Now
Hello Thomas,
Now talking about moving. Of course it should *not* be possible to
apply colour groups or flags after moving, it doesn't make sense.
Give up Thomas. This is a democracy and if the majority votes that water
can flow upstream... ;-)
--
Best regards,
Miguel A. Urech (El Escorial
Hello Krzysztof,
Saturday, September 4, 2004, 18:58 you wrote at
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I haven't tried exactly that yet. But following my logic the copy/move
_should_ do nothing. Wouldn't that be much easier for everyone to follow
and understand?
Why should I be forced to flag a message
Hello Alexander,
Saturday, September 4, 2004, 19:32 you wrote at
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Park the message, and then _copy_ it to folder a
Try to _move_ add write additional note log Message parked, thus -
copied if move action impossible
Can't understand you. Should this happen or does it? I
Hello Krzysztof,
Saturday, September 4, 2004, 18:45 you wrote at
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Anyway, would you think that would be easier to understand for any user?
Of course. I failed to understand the logic in the four variants you
described in your initial post. I believe actions should, no,
Hello MAU,
Saturday, September 4, 2004, 14:30 you wrote at
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Since there can be a lot of copy actions, for which order is
important.
I think you may be wrong here. If you consider _only_ the copy actions
(i.e. I want to copy a message to folders A, B and C), what
Hello MAU,
Saturday, September 4, 2004, 16:04 you wrote at
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The big question is: If the actions in a filter are, and should be,
executed in the order they are listed.
Answer is: Yes, the should be executed in the order they are listed.
snipped
Thanks for replying :)
No
Hello MAU,
Sure, that other actions are important too, but most effective
filtering is filtering to other folders.
M Of course they are important. These actions may mean delivering the
M original message but with some modifications made to it prior to
M delivering. But I disagree with you
Hello Boris,
The way TB! handles park message now is quite simple:
1. if message was parked before filter execution, it wouldn't be moved
2. if filter has parked message it continue execution like it wasn't
parked and as result you'll get parked message in destination folder
BA Indeed,
On Sunday, September 5, 2004 @ 6:17:48 AM, MAU wrote:
[snips]
MAU 1 - My first program is:
MAU Fill your cup with coffee
MAU Now drink it
MAU Now put 2 spoons of sugar in your cup
MAU Stir it
Yes, yes, this is all very entertaining, these analogies, but what if coffee
makes you
Hello 9Val,
On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 00:22:00 +0300 GMT (05/09/2004, 04:22 +0700 GMT),
9Val wrote:
9 I talked about any other action like parking message. I don't
9 understand why do you think that after moving it has no sence in other
9 operation while message is still accessible?
PMFJI. In
Hello Roelof,
On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 00:49:47 +0200 GMT (05/09/2004, 05:49 +0700 GMT),
Roelof Otten wrote:
M Now throw you cup of coffee down the drain
M Now drink it
M Did the coffee Mary drunk have any sugar? (*)
RO We might be checking you. ;-)
M 3.- She couldn't drink any
M i c C u l l e n wrote:
MicCullen Yes, yes, this is all very entertaining, these analogies,
MicCullen but what if coffee makes you vomit? Huh?
That's covered. Use program 3.
,- [ MAU wrote: ]
| Fill your cup with coffee
| Now put 2 spoons of sugar in the cup
| Stir it
|
Hello Allen!
On Saturday, September 04, 2004, 7:22 PM, you wrote:
MB And one for 9Val: :batcoffee:
AD Off topic, but . . . Is there such an emoticon, or is common
AD practice to make them up on the spot, leaving us to use our
AD imaginations between the colons?
Yes, there is indeed such an
27 matches
Mail list logo
