* Jeremy Blosser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-03-28 01:17]: > > i find it bad by design that "message-hook" does > > not have an matching "unmessage-hook" command. > There's really no difference between 'unmessage-hook', > 'unsend-hook', 'unfoo-hook', etc. vs. 'unhook message-hook', etc. > It could be argued either was cleaner than the other, > for different reasons. In the end it's just semantics.
alright - let me rephrase this: you can add hooks one by one - but apparently you cannot remove a *specific* hook which forces you to remove *all* hooks. now, that's "unclean design"! (or am I missing soemthing here?" > But if you don't like it, by all means submit > a diff to extend the functionality. i would - but I stopped attempting that. there's a story behind this - but who cares? > > this should be taken care of before mutt-1.4 ships. > Er, is there any conceivable change you *don't* > think should be done before 1.4 ships? that's why I separated my list of "pet peeves" from the "wishlist" which has many my items. Sven [adjusting his display_filter - fun!]
