Re: Header field larger or smaller than X

2020-05-19 Thread MFPA
Hi On Monday 18 May 2020 at 2:02:10 AM, in , Andrew Savchenko wrote:- > Excuse me, how is this relevant to the question asked? The original message, asking for a way to test if the value of a header field was larger or smaller than X, didn't give a context for where you wanted to perform that

Re: Header field larger or smaller than X

2020-05-17 Thread MFPA
Hi On Saturday 16 May 2020 at 11:41:35 AM, in , Andrew Savchenko wrote:- > Could you please clarify? Would you use it via > "matches all as RegExp" > selector? I was thinking of the macros you use in message templates, etc. Try an internet search for: regex "number greater than" Or if the

Re: Header field larger or smaller than X

2020-05-16 Thread Marck Pearlstone
On 16 May 2020 at 11:41 Andrew Savchenko wrote and made these points ... AS> Screenshot attached (hopefully will work after Marck has changed AS> something on server's side). .. which failed. Testing... -- Cheers -- Marck D Pearlstone -- List moderator and fellow end user TB! v9.1.18.6

Re: Header field larger or smaller than X

2020-05-15 Thread MFPA
Hi On Thursday 14 May 2020 at 12:34:40 PM, in , Andrew Savchenko wrote:- > Hello, > Is there a way to test if header field is greater or > smaller than "X"? If you mean the value of a specific header field is greater or smaller than "X", maybe the %IF or %IFN macro? -- Best regards MFPA

Re: Header field larger or smaller than X

2020-05-15 Thread Marck Pearlstone
On 15 May 2020 at 07:18 Andrew Savchenko wrote and made these points AS> Friday, May 15, 2020, 12:07:31 AM, you wrote: >> There was no attachment. AS> Here we go, 2Kb file: https://i.imgur.com/6BtdEB5.png AS> Marck, could you please check on your (aka server's) end? Checked. I found one

Re: Header field larger or smaller than X

2020-05-14 Thread Jack S. LaRosa
Hello Andrew, On Thursday, May 14, 2020 you wrote: AS> Hello, AS> Is there a way to test if header field is greater or smaller than "X"? AS> Attaching screenshot of the current "solution" which is obviously AS> non-optimal and tedious to maintain if the range of values is large. There was no