From cffc867a747987b665c6701a7f47c31e508d64cd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Austin Clements Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 12:35:08 +1900 Subject: [PATCH] Re: [PATCH 0/6] API for iterating over all messages in a thread --- f5/60a353b81129ce02addf371d3119bbf53cf223 | 149 ++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 149 insertions(+) create mode 100644 f5/60a353b81129ce02addf371d3119bbf53cf223 diff --git a/f5/60a353b81129ce02addf371d3119bbf53cf223 b/f5/60a353b81129ce02addf371d3119bbf53cf223 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..87f05b32a --- /dev/null +++ b/f5/60a353b81129ce02addf371d3119bbf53cf223 @@ -0,0 +1,149 @@ +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 E6D5F431FAF + for ; Mon, 26 Nov 2012 09:35:14 -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 HNF8Y9zxu782 for ; + Mon, 26 Nov 2012 09:35:14 -0800 (PST) +Received: from dmz-mailsec-scanner-7.mit.edu (DMZ-MAILSEC-SCANNER-7.MIT.EDU + [18.7.68.36]) + by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4737E431FAE + for ; Mon, 26 Nov 2012 09:35:14 -0800 (PST) +X-AuditID: 12074424-b7fbe6d000003b02-22-50b3a851d8d7 +Received: from mailhub-auth-1.mit.edu ( [18.9.21.35]) + by dmz-mailsec-scanner-7.mit.edu (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP + id AD.24.15106.158A3B05; Mon, 26 Nov 2012 12:35:13 -0500 (EST) +Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (OUTGOING-AUTH.MIT.EDU [18.7.22.103]) + by mailhub-auth-1.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.9.2) with ESMTP id qAQHZCsH004081; + Mon, 26 Nov 2012 12:35:13 -0500 +Received: from awakening.csail.mit.edu (awakening.csail.mit.edu [18.26.4.91]) + (authenticated bits=0) + (User authenticated as amdragon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) + by outgoing.mit.edu (8.13.6/8.12.4) with ESMTP id qAQHZ8Zx000062 + (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); + Mon, 26 Nov 2012 12:35:11 -0500 (EST) +Received: from amthrax by awakening.csail.mit.edu with local (Exim 4.80) + (envelope-from ) + id 1Td2aK-0001T5-BF; Mon, 26 Nov 2012 12:35:08 -0500 +Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 12:35:08 -0500 +From: Austin Clements +To: Tomi Ollila +Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] API for iterating over all messages in a thread +Message-ID: <20121126173508.GQ4562@mit.edu> +References: <1353819427-13182-1-git-send-email-amdragon@mit.edu> + <87ehjhkb3a.fsf@qmul.ac.uk> <20121125212059.GN4562@mit.edu> + +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: +User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) +X-Brightmail-Tracker: + H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFupjleLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42IR4hRV1g1csTnAoPOTmMXquTwW12/OZLZ4 + s3IeqwOzx85Zd9k9Dn9dyOLxbNUt5gDmKC6blNSczLLUIn27BK6M/+u2sxV8kqr4f+c3YwPj + R5EuRk4OCQETiQsNn5ghbDGJC/fWs3UxcnEICexjlDh7qZ8VwtnAKHHl4lFGCOcik8Slw0uZ + IZwljBL9vw4xgfSzCKhK9KyZwwpiswloSGzbv5wRxBYRUJF40LYeLM4s4Cox48IusHphAQ+J + B79/gtm8AtoSVz5vZoIYuoxRovfLFFaIhKDEyZlPWCCatSRu/HsJVMQBZEtLLP/HARLmFDCQ + mHv1BTuILQq0a8rJbWwTGIVmIemehaR7FkL3AkbmVYyyKblVurmJmTnFqcm6xcmJeXmpRbrm + ermZJXqpKaWbGEHBzu6isoOx+ZDSIUYBDkYlHt4DSzYHCLEmlhVX5h5ilORgUhLl3TMXKMSX + lJ9SmZFYnBFfVJqTWnyIUYKDWUmE93sjUI43JbGyKrUoHyYlzcGiJM57PeWmv5BAemJJanZq + akFqEUxWhoNDSYLXdTlQo2BRanpqRVpmTglCmomDE2Q4D9BwX5Aa3uKCxNzizHSI/ClGRSlx + XneQhABIIqM0D64XloxeMYoDvSLMmwVSxQNMZHDdr4AGMwENTr6+EWRwSSJCSqqBsY43JPma + EnfadT2xikyR2QfsJ6+IiHjlGhl/9NKPeNcZ84TsW5Z/jSxjDAut6XN4fPzXX0U/8SVvNGIm + 7rt5Lax2t32e0O7jnGeTlV6dufziQ5z0QWPu+WxCVtdiTvzt91iaeo5v75XJqqvLm6bJ7bBm + /3ekV3re/b1PP7BZayu87JZhZ5rDrMRSnJFoqMVcVJwIAIvw24QhAwAA +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: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 17:35:15 -0000 + +Quoth Tomi Ollila on Nov 26 at 7:19 pm: +> On Sun, Nov 25 2012, Austin Clements wrote: +> +> > Quoth Mark Walters on Nov 25 at 2:31 pm: +> >> +> >> Hi +> >> +> >> This series looks good to me (I have not reviewed the two bindings +> >> patches). Patch 2 looks like it makes things much easier to follow than +> >> the current code (if I understood the current pointer stuff it +> >> constructs the top-level list by doing pointer stuff to remove all +> >> messages which are replies from the complete message list). Indeed, the +> >> diff is more complicated than the new code! +> >> +> >> On Sun, 25 Nov 2012, Austin Clements wrote: +> >> > This series adds a library API for iterating over all messages in a +> >> > thread in sorted order. This is easy for the library to provide and +> >> > difficult to obtain from the current API. Plus, if you don't count +> >> > the code added to the bindings, this series is actually a net +> >> > decrease of 4 lines of code because of simplifications it enables. +> >> > +> >> > Do we want the API to do more? Currently it's very minimal, but I can +> >> > imagine two ways it could be generalized. It could take an argument +> >> > to indicate which message list to return, which could be all messages, +> >> > matched messages, top-level messages, or maybe even unmatched messages +> >> > (possibly all in terms of message flags). It could also take an +> >> > argument indicating the desired sort order. Currently, the caller can +> >> > use existing message flag APIs to distinguish matched and unmatched +> >> > messages and there's a separate function for the top-level messages. +> >> > However, if the API could do all of these things, it would subsume +> >> > various other API functions, such as notmuch_thread_get_*_date. +> >> +> >> I don't know if this is the right API. For the matched message etc I +> >> think using the existing message flag APIs is simple enough. I am not +> >> sure about sort orders though: that looks like it would be much easier +> >> for the caller to have the correct sort by I am not sure what users +> >> would need it. +> > +> > For sort order, I would be inclined to simply construct the reverse +> > list the first time a caller asks for it. Theoretically the caller +> > could do this just as easily as the library, except that we don't +> > expose the list routines. +> > +> > If I do add sort order, I would also want to add some control over +> > which list is returned, since it would be asymmetric to be able to +> > request all messages in either order, but top-level messages only in +> > oldest-first. I think this would be pretty simple, and would give us +> > a reasonably general-purpose and extensible API. (It would also solve +> > the naming conundrum I mentioned below in my original email.) +> +> The code looks good to me. +> +> I'm interested to see the extensible interface for returning desired +> list in desired sort order :) + +I'll give this a shot (probably later today) and people can see what +they think. + +> Tomi +> +> > +> >> Best wishes +> >> +> >> Mark +> >> +> >> +> >> > +> >> > Also, is this the right name for the new API? In particular, if we do +> >> > later want to add a function that returns, say, the list of matched +> >> > messages, we'll have a convention collision with +> >> > notmuch_thread_get_matched_messages, which returns only a count. -- 2.26.2