1 Return-Path: <Sebastian@SSpaeth.de>
\r
2 X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
\r
3 Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
\r
4 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
\r
5 by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB1D0429E27
\r
6 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Mon, 9 May 2011 18:00:51 -0700 (PDT)
\r
7 X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org
\r
11 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.09 tagged_above=-999 required=5
\r
12 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1,
\r
13 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, T_MIME_NO_TEXT=0.01] autolearn=disabled
\r
14 Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1])
\r
15 by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
\r
16 with ESMTP id AUft7FgMEM5f for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;
\r
17 Mon, 9 May 2011 18:00:51 -0700 (PDT)
\r
18 Received: from homiemail-a76.g.dreamhost.com (mailbigip.dreamhost.com
\r
20 by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40215429E26
\r
21 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Mon, 9 May 2011 18:00:51 -0700 (PDT)
\r
22 Received: from homiemail-a76.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
\r
23 by homiemail-a76.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AE51458080;
\r
24 Mon, 9 May 2011 18:00:50 -0700 (PDT)
\r
25 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=SSpaeth.de; h=from:to:subject
\r
26 :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version:
\r
27 content-type; q=dns; s=sspaeth.de; b=azxpWIOOqew6ig0ZRQcbHq2ibkT
\r
28 nkPPSjNGf9ReSwuPEvJNMbQAp9s9qVNpjX9sFMwCDR14vorXl84pczQOKEqPhPTH
\r
29 g+tTDyGRkA7Y8nLlK2tRUpkU6SALofqYuEnFXMf/2LzVpxEsndDvi3FgdysHhj9I
\r
31 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=SSpaeth.de; h=from:to
\r
32 :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version:
\r
33 content-type; s=sspaeth.de; bh=vPqNp0k2gybtKmIdECYhaCMbNOI=; b=N
\r
34 Zr4/PZ+lXJwL89BQUKhPGdQ3eKIegVDPNQ93sPO7rSq46OYWnBF9x2UuxtG8sBal
\r
35 45ftx3ZXB2drh+wcu2Qb5dyg8wUyNBkJSrR49LIlEXK9MQZJz2fgDCstbgXE6ydk
\r
36 pgUwPSqeN+XJnpOYRBNqpVAcot8rATTFGuT4SeYGN8=
\r
37 Received: from spaetzbook.sspaeth.de (c80-217-195-47.bredband.comhem.se
\r
39 (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits))
\r
40 (No client certificate requested)
\r
41 (Authenticated sender: fax@sspaeth.de)
\r
42 by homiemail-a76.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AE269458079;
\r
43 Mon, 9 May 2011 18:00:48 -0700 (PDT)
\r
44 Received: by spaetzbook.sspaeth.de (sSMTP sendmail emulation);
\r
45 Tue, 10 May 2011 03:00:45 +0200
\r
46 From: Sebastian Spaeth <Sebastian@SSpaeth.de>
\r
47 To: David Bremner <david@tethera.net>, Anton Khirnov <anton@khirnov.net>,
\r
48 notmuch@notmuchmail.org
\r
49 Subject: Re: [PATCH] python/thread: always return a string in
\r
51 In-Reply-To: <87bozcvzdy.fsf@zancas.localnet>
\r
52 References: <1304924794-20380-1-git-send-email-anton@khirnov.net>
\r
53 <87bozcvzdy.fsf@zancas.localnet>
\r
54 User-Agent: Notmuch/0.5-164-g8ce82ed (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.1.50.1
\r
55 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
\r
56 Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 03:00:44 +0200
\r
57 Message-ID: <87zkmv5pz6.fsf@SSpaeth.de>
\r
59 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";
\r
60 micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
\r
61 X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
\r
62 X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13
\r
64 List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."
\r
65 <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>
\r
66 List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,
\r
67 <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>
\r
68 List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>
\r
69 List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>
\r
70 List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>
\r
71 List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,
\r
72 <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>
\r
73 X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 01:00:52 -0000
\r
76 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
\r
78 On Mon, 09 May 2011 09:20:41 -0300, David Bremner <david@tethera.net> wrote:
\r
79 > On Mon, 9 May 2011 09:06:34 +0200, Anton Khirnov <anton@khirnov.net> wro=
\r
81 > > Now None is returned when those don't exist, which is inconvenient to
\r
84 > I'm not using the python bindings, but from a philosophical point of
\r
85 > view, this change makes me a bit uncomfortable since it apparently
\r
86 > merges two cases together, and makes an error (no Subject)
\r
87 > indistinguishable from an odd situation (Subject of empty string).
\r
88 > Or am I missing something here?
\r
92 This change makes me a bit uncomfortable too. 3 Reasons:
\r
94 =2D I believe users should be able to distinguish the case when someone
\r
95 uses an empty subject, and when someone doesn't specify a subject at
\r
98 =2D People have been writing code and breaking backwards compatability for
\r
99 such a small gain doesn't really seem worth it.
\r
101 =2D Testing-wise this is easy. Just test for "if subject:" on the returned
\r
102 value and you'll get both cases (empty and non-existing).
\r
104 But if people really want it, I won't object.
\r
109 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
\r
111 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
\r
112 Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
\r
114 iEYEARECAAYFAk3Ijj0ACgkQVYX1jMgnoGK9KACfWcOpLx/BBx6ag1dkf7KGN5yX
\r
115 PyAAn0kBkL6eqFKegSJprr7HE+GiSLeW
\r
117 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
\r