From: Michal Sojka <sojkam1@fel.cvut.cz>
To: Mark Walters <markwalters1009@gmail.com>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/10] cli: Introduce "notmuch address" command
In-Reply-To: <87d291ao34.fsf@qmul.ac.uk>
References: <1415058622-21162-1-git-send-email-sojkam1@fel.cvut.cz>
	<1415058622-21162-7-git-send-email-sojkam1@fel.cvut.cz>
	<87zjc72v79.fsf@qmul.ac.uk> <87y4rqliid.fsf@steelpick.2x.cz>
	<87d291ao34.fsf@qmul.ac.uk>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.18.2+178~g6e9e8bb (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.3.1
	(x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2014 13:23:52 +0100
Message-ID: <87y4rpkf8n.fsf@steelpick.2x.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: list

On Wed, Nov 05 2014, Mark Walters wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Nov 2014, Michal Sojka <sojkam1@fel.cvut.cz> wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 04 2014, Mark Walters wrote:
>>> On Mon, 03 Nov 2014, Michal Sojka <sojkam1@fel.cvut.cz> wrote:
>>>> This moves address-related functionality from search command to the
>>>> new address command. The implementation shares almost all code and
>>>> some command line options.
>>>>
>>>> Options --offset and --limit were intentionally not included in the
>>>> address command, because they refer to messages numbers, which users
>>>> do not see in the output. This could confuse users because, for
>>>> example, they could see more addresses in the output that what was
>>>> specified with --limit. This functionality can be correctly
>>>> reimplemented for addresses later.
>>>
>>> I am not sure about this: we already have this anomaly for output=3Dfil=
es
>>> say. Also I can imagine calling notmuch address --limit=3D1000 ... to g=
et
>>> a bunch of recent addresses quickly and I really am wanting to look at
>>> 1000 messages, not collect 1000 addresses.
>>
>> I think that one of the reasons for having the new "address" command is
>> to have cleaner user interface. And including "anomalies" doesn't sound
>> like a way to achieve this. I think that now you can use "date:" query
>> to limit the search.
>>
>> I volunteer to implement "address --limit" properly after 0.19. This
>> should be easy.
>
> I think this depends on how you view limit: is it to limit the output
> (roughly to run "head" on the output), or is to bound the amount of work
> notmuch has to do (eg to make sure you don't get a long delay). Your
> suggestion is definitely the former, whereas I am more worried about the
> latter: limit in your definition could take an essentially unbounded
> amount of time.

Why? If I understand you correctly, you think of limit in terms of
messages. There is 1:N mapping between messages and addresses, where
N=C2=A0>=3D=C2=A01. If I limit the number of printed addresses, I limit the=
 number
of messages as well. Only if N is zero (which probably can be the case
with Bcc and --output=3Drecipients) then it can result in unbounded work
(provided you have infinite number of Bcc only messages in your
database=C2=A0:-)).

Do I miss something?

-Michal