Return-Path: X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2B4C6DE01BE for ; Fri, 10 Jun 2016 04:50:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.011 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.011 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=disabled Received: from arlo.cworth.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (arlo.cworth.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id emB-8hsMRKLr for ; Fri, 10 Jun 2016 04:50:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fethera.tethera.net (fethera.tethera.net [198.245.60.197]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D93256DE0130 for ; Fri, 10 Jun 2016 04:50:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from remotemail by fethera.tethera.net with local (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1bBKxI-0001MI-Kh; Fri, 10 Jun 2016 07:50:28 -0400 Received: (nullmailer pid 436 invoked by uid 1000); Fri, 10 Jun 2016 11:50:39 -0000 From: David Bremner To: Tomi Ollila , notmuch Subject: Re: [PATCH] WIP: regexp matching in 'subject' and 'from' In-Reply-To: References: <1465265149-7174-1-git-send-email-david@tethera.net> <1465525688-30913-1-git-send-email-david@tethera.net> <87d1npydc2.fsf@zancas.localnet> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.22+28~gb9bf3f4 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.5.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 08:50:39 -0300 Message-ID: <87ziqtw9dc.fsf@zancas.localnet> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 11:50:52 -0000 Tomi Ollila writes: > On Fri, Jun 10 2016, David Bremner wrote: > >> David Bremner writes: >> and of course everywhere it says #ifdef HAVE_XAPIAN_FIELD_PROCESSOR, is >> should say #if. > > ... is there a static code analyzer which notices such a mistakes... ? It seems tough for a static analyzer, because the bug is really in misunderstanding the build system (which always defines that symbol) rather than the code itself. d