-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday, October 10 at 12:54 PM, quoth martin f krafft:
>also sprach Kyle Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007.10.10.1245 +0100]:
>> current next
>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> !O & !N N <--- This is the crucial difference, right?
>
>Almost, but yes. My argument is that this behaviour should depend on
>$mark_old. If that's set, the result should be O; otherwise N.
That doesn't make much sense to me. If I have a read message and I say
"toggle-new", why would mutt assume that I really wanted to
"toggle-old"? Perhaps what's needed is a different function?
>> N !O & !N
>> O !O & !N
>
>This is also a difference. Pressing N on an O message makes it N.
>That may be okay, but if $mark_old is set, I'd say it should rather
>clear the O flag (and set !O & !N).
Ahhh, right. I guess this gets down to exactly what "toggle-new" is
supposed to mean. At the moment, obviously, it means "if not new, make
it new, else if new, make it not-new", which is a very straightforward
use of the definition of the word "toggle".
Unfortunately, I think that to get the behavior you want ("if not new
and not old, make old, else if new or old make not-new and not-old")
would require a completely new function. Perhaps submit a feature
request to mutt-dev
~Kyle
- --
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his
government.
-- Edward Abbey
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: Thank you for using encryption!
iD8DBQFHDMAABkIOoMqOI14RAhsGAKDm2+YsUP/6NIcinI2LMqYxHbjvPQCgq/8n
1iTaWf5RjV3NCyvCxMz60po=
=78UM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
