Eric Kolve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > What do you think of associating a cost and benefit score to each rule > and then you would just iterate over all the rules in order of > greatest benefit for least cost until you hit the spam threshold? > This may be a bit extreme since you would have to do quite bit of work > tagging all the rules, but should provide a nice optimization.
It's possible and might be reasonable if we did the sorting/ordering at start-time instead of per-message. Negative rules would still have to go first and always be run and you'd want it to be pre-Bayes and pre-network-result-harvesting for performance reasons. Decision tree would share a lot of the same (predicted) benefits. Daniel -- Daniel Quinlan anti-spam (SpamAssassin), Linux, http://www.pathname.com/~quinlan/ and open source consulting
