Hello MAU, On Thursday, September 9, 2004 at 4:37:13 PM you [M] wrote (at least in part):
M>>> 4.- Actions possible before and after a Move. >> >> Agreed to the "compromise", as this is what I'd call "the natural way" :-) M> Yes, but "the natural way" should be clearly explained to the users just M> in case. Well, OK. That's done quite fast and easy: "A filter treats a message in top-down order of instructions. Everything is performed and applied on 'the message' where ever it might be currently located. A 'copy' actions creates an anonymous duplicate in the desired destination, which is not available for further actions. Everything done to a message after a 'delete' action is treated as 'not done anyway', because there is nothing left that could actions be performed on." All in all this description should cover most of what's the essence ;-) Or even shorter: "Don't care for where the message is, just deal with it. A 'copy' action does not create a new handle to deal with, but only a duplicate manifestation of the message with all it's states. A 'delete' action disables you to do anything with this message from point of deletion downwards." M>>> Since the filter have names, what about including unstructured 'GO M>>> TO filter' as a possible action? >> >> *woaaa* That'll open a can of worms :-) M> I knew it! I knew it! ;-) But they were so useful! Not allowing them in M> modern languages is a way of, as 9Val would say, "spying" on the M> programmers ;-) Name it as you like, "unstructured" is the key. ;-) Modern languages include GOTO (or similar) construct, but using them is a matter that should be thought about twice. As we don't have complex syntax abilities for avoiding loops I'd say it's a bad idea to implement GOTO-like possibilities. You simply can't set a variable "been here" which can be checked second time a filter is entered, and therefore you're extremely limited in abilities to break a filter loop, created by GOTO. Implementing GOTO in NFS would IMHO require a quite complex filtering syntax near to a filtering programming language. This would require implementing something like 'procmail' or 'maildrop' with all it's control structures and abilities. Unless something like this is implemented I don't see good reasons to provide structural elements like mentioned GOTO :-) -- Regards Peter Palmreuther (The Bat! v3.0.0.8 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1) Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. - Sigmund Freud ________________________________________________________ Current beta is 3.00.08 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
