From: Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>
To: Carl Worth <cworth@cworth.org>,
 notmuch mailing list <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>
Subject: Re: NOTMUCH_STATUS_LAST_STATUS problematic across additive library
 upgrades
In-Reply-To: <87bna1ms58.fsf@wondoo.home.cworth.org>
References: <87y4d5q38i.fsf@alice.fifthhorseman.net>
 <87vb89n83m.fsf@wondoo.home.cworth.org>
 <87poyhpzbb.fsf@alice.fifthhorseman.net>
 <87bna1ms58.fsf@wondoo.home.cworth.org>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.21 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.5.1
 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Date: Tue, 08 Dec 2015 10:55:25 -0500
Message-ID: <87fuzdoryq.fsf@alice.fifthhorseman.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: list

On Tue 2015-12-08 00:22:11 -0500, Carl Worth wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 07 2015, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
>> I note that it's exposed in the go bindings -- maybe it shouldn't be
>> exposed in any of the bindings that can avoid exposing it?
>
> Quite likely. It's only there in C because there's no other way to know
> the bounds for iterating over all possible values for a particular
> enum. If other languages don't have this deficiency, then they shouldn't
> need this silly thing.

OK, so maybe the following patch should be applied.  Perhaps someone who
understands the go bindings better than i do can comment on it?

The python bindings don't seem to include LAST_STATUS, so i think
they're OK.

        --dkg

diff --git a/bindings/go/src/notmuch/notmuch.go b/bindings/go/src/notmuch/notmuch.go
index 0fff1ab..9f910cb 100644
--- a/bindings/go/src/notmuch/notmuch.go
+++ b/bindings/go/src/notmuch/notmuch.go
@@ -28,8 +28,6 @@ const (
 	STATUS_TAG_TOO_LONG
 	STATUS_UNBALANCED_FREEZE_THAW
 	STATUS_UNBALANCED_ATOMIC
-
-	STATUS_LAST_STATUS
 )
 
 func (self Status) String() string {