Return-Path: X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3266431FCB for ; Mon, 12 Jan 2015 15:47:27 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 2.438 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.438 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DNS_FROM_AHBL_RHSBL=2.438] autolearn=disabled Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tW6xknrgwzbx for ; Mon, 12 Jan 2015 15:47:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.webfaction.com (mail6.webfaction.com [74.55.86.74]) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97CDD431FC3 for ; Mon, 12 Jan 2015 15:47:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (87-231-242-54.rev.numericable.fr [87.231.242.54]) by smtp.webfaction.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 601EC26EA361; Mon, 12 Jan 2015 23:47:22 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 00:47:19 +0100 From: Bartosz Telenczuk To: Ian Main , notmuch@notmuchmail.org Message-ID: <54b45d071fd20_7f93fe5bd4401f087@bts-MacBook-Pro.local.notmuch> In-Reply-To: <1413828111-2879-1-git-send-email-imain@stemwinder.org> References: <1412618116-27586-1-git-send-email-imain@stemwinder.org> <1413828111-2879-1-git-send-email-imain@stemwinder.org> Subject: RE: [PATCH v3] VIM: Improve moving between messages in a thread Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 09:38:02 -0800 X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 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: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 23:47:27 -0000 Hi Ian, The patch looks good. I tested it on my system and it works fine. I just have one suggestion regarding coding style. > +function! s:show_prev_msg() > function! s:show_next_msg() Since these functions are almost the same, you could avoid code repetition by replacing them by a function which takes (positive or negative) increment as an argument. Cheers, Bartosz