Re: [defadvice, advice-add ]

[Announcements and discussions for GNUS, the GNU Emacs Usenet newsreader (in English)]

> Uwe Brauer via "Announcements and discussions for GNUS, the GNU Emacs
> Usenet newsreader (in English)"  writes:


> Most nadvice pieces, including :before advice pieces, are passed the
> arguments that are passed to the advised function.
> `gnus-summary-followup-with-original' is always called with at least one
> argument.  You can just throw all arguments away:
> (defun my-toggle-bcc-check (&rest _) ...).  Was it that?



So the following seems to solve my issues with advice 

--8<---cut here---start->8---
(defun check-my-to-field (&optional arg)
  "This function will be run before you execute followup. And it
warns you if your email address is not in the To field. That
warning is a safty message if you had been only on the BCC
field!!"
  (interactive "P")
--8<---cut here---end--->8---


Thanks!!!


Still the function should be generalised with a more sophisticated
search, but right now it more than sufficient for my purposes and just a
couple of minutes ago I faced a situation where I was in the BCC



BTW I am still wondering that such a functionality is not implemented,
yet.

Uwe Brauer 

Re: [defadvice, advice-add ]

[Announcements and discussions for GNUS, the GNU Emacs Usenet newsreader (in English)]

>>> "CG" == Christoph Groth  writes:

> Uwe Brauer wrote:
>> BTW I am still wondering that such a functionality is not implemented,
>> yet.

> Could you please post the complete code once you are more or less done
> with it?
Sure, I am still testing it a bit.  
So, I will send it over the weekend.  

I might also send it to the dev list and  
ask for more opinions since it is not very sophisticated. Right now, in  
newsgroups, it indicates false positives, so I deactivate it manually  
using a function that I have bound to a key. A better solution would be to  
modify the search, but I don’t have time for that.  

In your mailbox, emails from mailing lists might also cause false  
positives.  

I can live with false positives, but false negatives are much more  
damaging.

Uwe 




-- 
I strongly condemn Hamas heinous despicable pogroms/atrocities on Israel
I strongly condemn Putin's war of aggression against Ukraine.
I support to deliver weapons to Ukraine's military. 
I support the EU and NATO membership of Ukraine. 



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Re: [defadvice, advice-add ]

[Christoph Groth]

Uwe Brauer wrote:

> BTW I am still wondering that such a functionality is not implemented,
> yet.

Could you please post the complete code once you are more or less done
with it?

Thanks
Christoph

Custom article quit function and reopen issue

[Bartosz Kaczyński]

I attempted to create a custom function to close the article buffer and
delete its window:

--8<---cut here---start->8---
(defun my-gnus-article-quit ()
  "Close the current article buffer and delete its window."
  (interactive)
  (kill-current-buffer)
  (delete-window))

(define-key gnus-article-mode-map (kbd "q") #'my-gnus-article-quit)
--8<---cut here---end--->8---

While this works in closing the article buffer, reopening the same
article results in a blank article in edit mode, which seems like
another potential issue.

Could you confirm if this is expected behavior or a bug? If it's a bug,
is there a recommended fix or workaround?

Best regards,
Bart

Re: Checking if user-mail-address is in To or CC (to avoid an embarrassing social situation) BCC

[James Thomas]

Uwe Brauer via "Announcements and discussions for GNUS, the GNU Emacs
Usenet newsreader (in English)"  writes:

>> Uwe Brauer writes:
>
>> Have you ruled out using the message-prune-recipient-rules and
>> message-dont-reply-to-names in (info "(message) Wide Reply")? They may
>> be enough for you (I haven't read your code).
>
> Thanks, but these have very different purpose. You use them to avoid
> doble sending to addresses you know in advance.

> My use case is very different as I described in my first posting. So I
> cannot know beforehand which address to include in one of these rules!

Sorry I meant the 'message-wide-reply-to-function' in the same page.
On the face of it, it seems to cover this use case:

> Robert can only avoid this by using a function (before replying to
> all) that checks whether the sender was included in the original
> email’s *To* or *CC* fields.

--