From: Mark Walters <markwalters1009@gmail.com>
To: David Edmondson <dme@dme.org>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] emacs: Report a lack of matches when calling
 `notmuch-show'.
In-Reply-To: <m260xw2vim.fsf@dme.org>
References: <1455112878-23497-1-git-send-email-dme@dme.org>
 <1455112878-23497-2-git-send-email-dme@dme.org> <87oabo5rix.fsf@qmul.ac.uk>
 <m260xw2vim.fsf@dme.org>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.18.1+485~gca076ce (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.4.1
 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 21:05:25 +0000
Message-ID: <87lh6s5l9m.fsf@qmul.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: list


On Wed, 10 Feb 2016, David Edmondson <dme@dme.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 10 2016, Mark Walters wrote:
>> This basically looks fine to me and all tests pass. The code movement
>> and cleanup all looks fine.
>
> Thanks.
>
>> Two minor things, one tiny nit below; and I wonder whether just having
>> the buffer say "No search results" (or something similar) and leave
>> the user to kill it would be nicer than dinging (and more in line with
>> the way search and tree behave).
>>
>> [In some sense I think this way is right and search and tree are wrong,
>> but that is probably difficult to get round as search and tree run
>> asynchronously.]
>
> What if we did "notmuch count $query" first in the search and tree case,
> and did the "(ding) (message ...)" thing if the count returned 0? (Just
> wondering about whether having everything behave that way would be
> possible and acceptable.)
>
> The original impetus for this change was someone who hits an id: button
> that is either a false match (i.e it wasn't ever intended to be a
> notmuch reference) or for a message that they don't have. In both of
> those cases popping up a buffer that says only "No match." would be
> annoying. If we were considering the case where people are using "M-x
> notmuch-show", it seems less clear on the right thing to do, but overall
> I prefer this approach to the useless buffer that I have to kill/quit.
>

I am quite happy to leave it as you have it with the ding; currently we
have an obscure error message and this is obviously better so (with the
comment change below) +1 from me.

Best wishes

Mark

>>> +      ;; Cache the original tags for each message so that we can display
>>> +      ;; changes.
>>
>> ^^ I think "Store the original tags for each message" would be better,
>> particularly as this is nothing to do with the tag cache as used by say
>> notmuch-tag-clear-cache.
>
> Agreed - fixed.