From 53bb857d8f93f5b0bb6786f9bf36cb472d981a30 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Felipe Contreras Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 13:19:13 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] Re: [RFC] vim plugin rewrite II --- b2/57fc69489affe91e91c8caa1fd8b8d222bdba1 | 101 ++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 101 insertions(+) create mode 100644 b2/57fc69489affe91e91c8caa1fd8b8d222bdba1 diff --git a/b2/57fc69489affe91e91c8caa1fd8b8d222bdba1 b/b2/57fc69489affe91e91c8caa1fd8b8d222bdba1 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..7815819f9 --- /dev/null +++ b/b2/57fc69489affe91e91c8caa1fd8b8d222bdba1 @@ -0,0 +1,101 @@ +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 B9AA2431FBC + for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 04:19:16 -0700 (PDT) +X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org +X-Spam-Flag: NO +X-Spam-Score: -0.799 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.799 tagged_above=-999 required=5 + tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, + FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, 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 zbtrdb9ybQBF for ; + Fri, 4 May 2012 04:19:16 -0700 (PDT) +Received: from mail-wi0-f179.google.com (mail-wi0-f179.google.com + [209.85.212.179]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) + (No client certificate requested) + by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC811431FB6 + for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 04:19:15 -0700 (PDT) +Received: by wibhn6 with SMTP id hn6so1031037wib.2 + for ; Fri, 04 May 2012 04:19:13 -0700 (PDT) +DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; + h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to + :cc:content-type; + bh=YBRbLzLzu1CsOpeWYozy+BtGiOIQpfHL/keli/A0hiM=; + b=c+TA0/PJ+cE8Y1shVGwMwNKwnNePFJkgf/AdeHd48JmCwNU6FVuJrNF/EyIQOEqksK + 7zu4q5fpUQzgSGk6dJLXV6ch4gDuKXkhWh2eoH5YRmK8hDt3nMET3PGFcfAvQcyrLTcD + /MTAyDqGG72bmnWhd3D+t9aTC4WUMeOn2e6ZsNKEC+IZeBvJ3BTUzbENYdNgxZg5pr/e + dTTdSEKT9IEdWYnst/N9gr93sINYThyalBD5NzZHlru8PQySwNMOXekvn7NuTF4t3E3O + 4asm3ygY6dq0+FdR9b1sAZVQXy810LjlGkQ3ryvkuVSVKPK+cqrrtcKeMYSVlPU2q7HX + XaWw== +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Received: by 10.216.225.12 with SMTP id y12mr3610391wep.39.1336130353045; Fri, + 04 May 2012 04:19:13 -0700 (PDT) +Received: by 10.216.124.197 with HTTP; Fri, 4 May 2012 04:19:13 -0700 (PDT) +In-Reply-To: <20120502202340.4214.21470@daenerys.khirnov.net> +References: <20120114075443.27927.39754@daenerys.khirnov.net> + + + + <20120502202340.4214.21470@daenerys.khirnov.net> +Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 13:19:13 +0200 +Message-ID: + +Subject: Re: [RFC] vim plugin rewrite II +From: Felipe Contreras +To: Anton Khirnov +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 +Cc: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +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: Fri, 04 May 2012 11:19:16 -0000 + +On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 10:23 PM, Anton Khirnov wrote: + +> sorry for the late reply, I see you already reached the same point as +> me, except with ruby ;) Yay for competition. + +I think my plugin is a bit further. And yeah, competition is good, but +also collaboration; hopefully the 3 plugins can share as much as +possible. + +>> I was seriously considering to concentrate on this plugin instead of +>> the current one, but I'm afraid every little error causes a crash, +>> even when a subprocess fails (e.g. msmtp), so it's not really usable +>> for me. Not to mention that it's really hard to debug, because every +>> bug causes a crash, and sometimes I get random crashes with no +>> information about what caused it at all. +>> +>> I am starting to work on a version that uses ruby, and it doesn't seem +>> to have these issues, but lets see. I'm still not sure if we should +>> depend on ruby/python bindings, maybe there's a way to make them +>> optional. +>> +>> Anyway, if you find a way to improve the crash issues, let me know, so +>> far it's the only real issue I see with this plug-in. +> +> That is weird, I'm not getting any crashes here. On any exception in the +> python code it prints the backtrace and continues normally. I don't +> think I've ever seen it actually crash (not counting my ultimately +> unsuccessfull attempts at threading). I wonder what could cause this. + +Interesting. I would need to check that, but I don't have time right now =/ + +Cheers. + +-- +Felipe Contreras -- 2.26.2