1 Return-Path: <sojka@merica.cz>
\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 8DBCD431FCF
\r
6 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Tue, 4 Nov 2014 12:45:37 -0800 (PST)
\r
7 X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org
\r
11 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.224 tagged_above=-999 required=5
\r
12 tests=[DATE_IN_PAST_03_06=1.076, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3]
\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 RxU85UFhStSJ for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;
\r
17 Tue, 4 Nov 2014 12:45:30 -0800 (PST)
\r
18 Received: from relay.felk.cvut.cz (relay.felk.cvut.cz [147.32.80.7])
\r
19 by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBC76431FAE
\r
20 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Tue, 4 Nov 2014 12:45:29 -0800 (PST)
\r
21 Received: from control.felk.cvut.cz (control.felk.cvut.cz [147.32.87.4])
\r
22 by relay.felk.cvut.cz (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id sA4FZxMl036846;
\r
23 Tue, 4 Nov 2014 16:35:59 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from sojka@merica.cz)
\r
24 Received: from CONTROL/SpoolDir by control.felk.cvut.cz (Mercury 1.48);
\r
25 4 Nov 14 16:36:00 +0100
\r
26 Received: from SpoolDir by CONTROL (Mercury 1.48); 4 Nov 14 16:35:54 +0100
\r
27 Received: from rtime.felk.cvut.cz (147.32.86.92) by control.felk.cvut.cz
\r
28 (Mercury 1.48) with ESMTP; 4 Nov 14 16:35:53 +0100
\r
29 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=steelpick.2x.cz)
\r
30 by rtime.felk.cvut.cz with esmtp (Exim 4.80)
\r
31 (envelope-from <sojka@merica.cz>)
\r
32 id 1Xlg9A-0004xP-Hk; Tue, 04 Nov 2014 16:35:52 +0100
\r
33 Received: from wsh by steelpick.2x.cz with local (Exim 4.84)
\r
34 (envelope-from <sojka@merica.cz>)
\r
35 id 1XlcPB-0002Wr-G1; Tue, 04 Nov 2014 12:36:09 +0100
\r
36 From: Michal Sojka <sojkam1@fel.cvut.cz>
\r
37 To: David Bremner <david@tethera.net>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org
\r
38 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 08/10] cli: address: Do not output duplicate addresses
\r
39 In-Reply-To: <87a947monn.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca>
\r
40 References: <1415058622-21162-1-git-send-email-sojkam1@fel.cvut.cz>
\r
41 <1415058622-21162-9-git-send-email-sojkam1@fel.cvut.cz>
\r
42 <87a947monn.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca>
\r
43 User-Agent: Notmuch/0.18.2+157~ga00d359 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.3.1
\r
44 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
\r
45 Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2014 12:36:09 +0100
\r
46 Message-ID: <87a947mc46.fsf@steelpick.2x.cz>
\r
48 Content-Type: text/plain
\r
49 X-FELK-MailScanner-Information:
\r
50 X-MailScanner-ID: sA4FZxMl036846
\r
51 X-FELK-MailScanner: Found to be clean
\r
52 X-FELK-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (not cached,
\r
53 score=1.093, required 6, BAYES_00 -0.50, DATE_IN_PAST_03_06 1.59,
\r
54 HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS 0.00)
\r
55 X-FELK-MailScanner-SpamScore: s
\r
56 X-FELK-MailScanner-From: sojka@merica.cz
\r
57 X-FELK-MailScanner-Watermark: 1415720167.12737@Y0Rgo6YZHp5B4GF9H3aRWg
\r
58 X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
\r
59 X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13
\r
61 List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."
\r
62 <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>
\r
63 List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,
\r
64 <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>
\r
65 List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>
\r
66 List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>
\r
67 List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>
\r
68 List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,
\r
69 <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>
\r
70 X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2014 20:45:38 -0000
\r
72 On Tue, Nov 04 2014, David Bremner wrote:
\r
73 > Michal Sojka <sojkam1@fel.cvut.cz> writes:
\r
76 >> +/* Returns TRUE iff name and addr is duplicate. */
\r
78 > If you're revising this patch, it would be good to mention the side
\r
79 > effect of this function.
\r
81 >> -process_address_list (const search_context_t *ctx, InternetAddressList *list)
\r
82 >> +process_address_list (const search_context_t *ctx,
\r
83 >> + InternetAddressList *list)
\r
85 > It probably doesn't make any difference, but this looks like a needless
\r
86 > whitespace change.
\r
88 > This function definitely needs some comment / pointer to
\r
89 > documention. And probably not to have _my in the name.
\r
92 >> +_my_talloc_free_for_g_hash (void *ptr)
\r
94 >> + talloc_free (ptr);
\r
98 > I don't understand the name of the next subtest
\r
100 >> +test_begin_subtest "No --output"
\r
101 >> +notmuch address --output=sender --output=recipients '*' >OUTPUT
\r
103 This should be "notmuch address '*' >OUTPUT". I'll fix that.
\r
105 >> +# Use EXPECTED from previous subtest
\r
106 >> +test_expect_equal_file OUTPUT EXPECTED
\r
111 > nitpick, extra blank lines
\r
113 > So, AIUI, this is all of the series proposed for 0.19.
\r
117 > It looks close to OK to me, modulo some minor style nits. One
\r
118 > anonymous commentator on IRC mentioned the use of module scope
\r
119 > variables, I guess in patch 6/10. I'm not sure of a better solution,
\r
120 > but it's true in a perfect world we wouldn't have module local state.
\r
122 A possible solution would be fill in common_options structure
\r
123 programmatically, but this would make the code much less readable. I can
\r
124 think of a few other solutions but none of them would fit into "perfect
\r
127 I'll send updated patches in the evening (CET timezone).
\r