From: Jani Nikula Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 23:07:59 +0000 (+0200) Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 07/11] lib: added interface notmuch_thread_get_flag_messages X-Git-Url: http://git.tremily.us/gitweb.cgi?a=commitdiff_plain;h=f8d7493e3a8ab8b6de7a2a0fbdbc8795ff42a2db;p=notmuch-archives.git Re: [PATCH v4 07/11] lib: added interface notmuch_thread_get_flag_messages --- diff --git a/bd/37e82c79b5331c540c58cc93b6d43627533095 b/bd/37e82c79b5331c540c58cc93b6d43627533095 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..a7c7a29d7 --- /dev/null +++ b/bd/37e82c79b5331c540c58cc93b6d43627533095 @@ -0,0 +1,226 @@ +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 4C763431FBD + for ; Thu, 2 Feb 2012 15:08:06 -0800 (PST) +X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org +X-Spam-Flag: NO +X-Spam-Score: -0.7 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 + tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 FfU92uywqYy3 for ; + Thu, 2 Feb 2012 15:08:05 -0800 (PST) +Received: from mail-lpp01m010-f53.google.com (mail-lpp01m010-f53.google.com + [209.85.215.53]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) + (No client certificate requested) + by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0EBC3431FAF + for ; Thu, 2 Feb 2012 15:08:04 -0800 (PST) +Received: by lahd3 with SMTP id d3so1700581lah.26 + for ; Thu, 02 Feb 2012 15:08:03 -0800 (PST) +Received: by 10.152.109.161 with SMTP id ht1mr2483217lab.33.1328224083512; + Thu, 02 Feb 2012 15:08:03 -0800 (PST) +Received: from localhost (dsl-hkibrasgw4-fe50f800-253.dhcp.inet.fi. + [84.248.80.253]) + by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id k13sm3156059lbu.16.2012.02.02.15.08.00 + (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 02 Feb 2012 15:08:02 -0800 (PST) +From: Jani Nikula +To: Mark Walters , notmuch@notmuchmail.org, + amdragon@MIT.EDU +Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 07/11] lib: added interface + notmuch_thread_get_flag_messages +In-Reply-To: <871uqcswfb.fsf@qmul.ac.uk> +References: <874nv9rv79.fsf@qmul.ac.uk> + <1328204619-25046-7-git-send-email-markwalters1009@gmail.com> + <87k444yk6i.fsf@nikula.org> <871uqcswfb.fsf@qmul.ac.uk> +User-Agent: Notmuch/0.11+139~g4340989 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.3.1 + (i686-pc-linux-gnu) +Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2012 01:07:59 +0200 +Message-ID: <87d39wygts.fsf@nikula.org> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +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: Thu, 02 Feb 2012 23:08:06 -0000 + +On Thu, 02 Feb 2012 22:27:36 +0000, Mark Walters wrote: +> On Thu, 02 Feb 2012 23:55:33 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote: +> > +> > Hi Mark - +> > +> > This is my first look at any version of the series; apologies if I'm +> > clueless about some details... Please find some comments below. +> > +> > BR, +> > Jani. +> > +> > +> > On Thu, 2 Feb 2012 17:43:35 +0000, Mark Walters wrote: +> > > The function is +> > > notmuch_thread_get_flag_messages +> > > (notmuch_thread_t *thread, unsigned int flag_mask, unsigned int flags) +> > > +> > > and returns the number of messages with the specified flags on flag_mask. +> > +> > Is the purpose of this function to get the count of messages that have +> > certain flags set, certain flags not set, and certain flags don't-care? +> +> Yes: I was trying to follow Austin's suggestion from +> id:"20120124025331.GZ16740@mit.edu" (although stupidly I didn't +> follow his suggestion of a function name). +> +> > At the very least, I think the documentation of the function should be +> > greatly improved. +> > +> > I think the name of the function should be notmuch_thread_count_messages +> > which is like notmuch_query_count_messages, but for messages in threads +> > (and with some extra restrictions). +> +> Yes I like your name; before I change it do you (and others) prefer it +> to Austin's suggestion of notmuch_thread_count_flags. Or we could even +> be more verbose with something like +> notmuch_thread_count_messages_with_flags + +I'd like to make it clear that it's about message count. Not about +getting flags, not about flag counts. _with_flags is a matter of taste, +no strong opinions there. + +> +> > > /* Message flags */ +> > > typedef enum _notmuch_message_flag { +> > > - NOTMUCH_MESSAGE_FLAG_MATCH, +> > > - NOTMUCH_MESSAGE_FLAG_EXCLUDED +> > > + NOTMUCH_MESSAGE_FLAG_MATCH = (1<<0), +> > > + NOTMUCH_MESSAGE_FLAG_EXCLUDED = (1<<1), +> > > + NOTMUCH_MESSAGE_FLAG_MAX = (1<<2) +> > +> > How are these used by the current lib users at the moment? How will they +> > break with this change? +> +> The only existing flag is NOTMUCH_MESSAGE_FLAG_MATCH: that is currently +> zero but in the current code that is the bit offset of the flag; in my +> version it is the actual bit for the flag (otherwise I think flag masks +> end up very ugly). I believe all callers use notmuch_message_set_flag +> and notmuch_message_get_flag so they should not notice the difference. +> +> > Please align the assignments. +> +> Will do. +> +> > > @@ -457,8 +452,8 @@ _notmuch_thread_create (void *ctx, +> > > thread->message_hash = g_hash_table_new_full (g_str_hash, g_str_equal, +> > > free, NULL); +> > > +> > > - thread->total_messages = 0; +> > > - thread->matched_messages = 0; +> > > + for (i = 0; i < NOTMUCH_MESSAGE_FLAG_MAX; i++) +> > > + thread->flag_count_messages[i] = 0; +> > +> > memset (thread->flag_count_messages, 0, sizeof(thread->flag_count_messages)); +> +> +> Will do +> +> > > thread->oldest = 0; +> > > thread->newest = 0; +> > > +> > > @@ -473,6 +468,7 @@ _notmuch_thread_create (void *ctx, +> > > notmuch_messages_move_to_next (messages)) +> > > { +> > > unsigned int doc_id; +> > > + unsigned int message_flags; +> > > +> > > message = notmuch_messages_get (messages); +> > > doc_id = _notmuch_message_get_doc_id (message); +> > > @@ -485,6 +481,10 @@ _notmuch_thread_create (void *ctx, +> > > _notmuch_doc_id_set_remove (match_set, doc_id); +> > > _thread_add_matched_message (thread, message, sort); +> > > } +> > > + message_flags = +> > > + notmuch_message_get_flag (message, NOTMUCH_MESSAGE_FLAG_MATCH) | +> > > + notmuch_message_get_flag (message, NOTMUCH_MESSAGE_FLAG_EXCLUDED); +> > > + thread->flag_count_messages[message_flags]++; +> > +> > The first impression of using a set of flags as index is that there's a +> > bug. But this is to keep count of messages with certain flag sets rather +> > than total for each flag, right? I think this needs more comments, more +> > documentation. Already naming the field flag_set_message_counts or +> > similar would help greatly. +> +> I will try and document it better: on first reading I parsed your name +> as flag set (as verb) message counts whereas I assume you mean "flag +> set" as a noun! I will see if I can come up with something though. + +Yes, as a noun! :) + +> +> > > _notmuch_message_close (message); +> > > } +> > > @@ -511,15 +511,28 @@ notmuch_thread_get_thread_id (notmuch_thread_t *thread) +> > > } +> > > +> > > int +> > > +notmuch_thread_get_flag_messages (notmuch_thread_t *thread, unsigned int flag_mask, unsigned int flags) +> > > +{ +> > > + unsigned int i; +> > > + int count = 0; +> > > + for (i = 0; i < NOTMUCH_MESSAGE_FLAG_MAX; i++) +> > +> > ARRAY_SIZE (thread->flag_count_messages) +> +> ok +> +> > +> > > + if ((i & flag_mask) == (flags & flag_mask)) +> > > + count += thread->flag_count_messages[i]; +> > > + return count; +> > > +} +> > +> > I wonder if the same could be accomplished by using two flag mask +> > parameters, include_flag_mask and exclude_flag_mask. I'm thinking of the +> > usage, would it be easier to use: +> > +> > notmuch_query_count_messages (thread, NOTMUCH_MESSAGE_FLAG_MATCH, NOTMUCH_MESSAGE_FLAG_EXCLUDED); +> > +> > to get number of messages that have MATCH but not EXCLUDED? 0 as +> > include_flag_mask could still be special for "all", and you could use: +> > +> > notmuch_query_count_messages (thread, 0, NOTMUCH_MESSAGE_FLAG_EXCLUDED); +> > +> > Note the name change according to my earlier suggestion. It might be +> > wise to not export the function before the API is chrystal clear if +> > there is no pressing need to do so. +> +> (I assume you mean notmuch_thread_count_messages.) + +Doh! Yes. + +> Can I just check this +> would return the number of messages which have all the flags in +> include_flag_mask and none of the flags in exclude_flag_mask? + +Yes, but only if it makes sense to you! :) + +> +> I completely agree about leaving it until we have the API well worked +> out. I wrote it in response to Austin's suggestion and then it looked +> like it would useful in my attempts to remove the +> notmuch_query_set_omit_excluded_messages API. However, those attempts +> failed so it doesn't have any users yet. +> +> Best wishes +> +> Mark