Hi, On Thu, Mar 21, 2002 at 07:25:50:AM -0500 David T-G wrote: > ...and then Rocco Rutte said... > % There's only one thing I really miss: I'd like to be abled to define my > % own commands. Something like: > % > % define <my-command-1> '<mutt-command-1><mutt-command-2><enter>' > % define <my-command-2> '<mutt-command-1><my-command-1><mutt-command-3><enter>' > % > % in my .muttrc to bind to keys instead of building ugly looking > % statements based on 'macro'.
> If you accept for the moment that such a define feature would either be > limited to defining global commands or have to take a context parameter > (pager, index, compose, ...) to set the scope of the command, how are the > two at all different? > macro index ,filter 'set editor=filter;<edit-message>;set editor=vim' > define index ,filter 'set editor=filter;<edit-message>;set editor=vim' Good, this is the first step. See my example. As far as I experienced I would have to include the first set of commands (instead of just the name) if I wanted to create another macro which includes the first. Didn't unterstand that? Okay, another example: I start with: macro index ,filter 'set editor=filter;<edit-message>;set editor=vim' and then do: macro index ,name 'set sendmail=mail.pl;set editor=filter;<edit-message>;set editor=vim;set sendmail=/usr/sbin/sendmail' What I'd love to have is instead: macro index ,name 'set sendmail=mail.pl;<myfirstmacroname>;sed sendmail=/usr/sbin/sendmail' See? Regards, Rocco
msg25893/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
