On 2007-06-08 15:09:51 +0000, Rocco Rutte wrote: > Mutt is supposed to continue on line 2 since it's actually within > an encoded word (but it doesn't know since it never saw '=?'). So > the first part evaluates to false since the word is "too long" > and in_encoded_word errorneously is 0.
Actually, I think the logic that deals with the situation after wrapping is flawed somewhat more deeply. Given how hard this code is to read, though, something smells like a rewrite here. Thanks for tracking this down further; I'll have a stab now. Cheers, -- Thomas Roessler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
